Sunday, April 26, 2009

Raiders Draft Day Autopsy

I am shocked—shocked!—that folks are shocked—shocked!—that I might be disappointed in our draft.

Before the draft, I said that I didn’t think the Raiders should use their first pick on a receiver. I wanted a tackle. I felt that we should get aggressive about bolstering our lines with young talent. That was my take.

Therefore, it goes without saying that I didn’t think the Raiders should have picked Darrius Heyward-Bey with their first pick, let alone Crabtree or Maclin.

Does that mean I’m convinced DHB will be a bust? No. It means that I think from the standpoints of value (seventh pick in the draft) and positional priority (wide receiver over, say, offensive line), we got the pick wrong. Naturally, this leads to disappointment.

That’s my TAKE. Need I remind folks that this place is called Raider Take, not Raider Wait and See?

Saying that I shouldn’t be disappointed because the draft is ultimately a crapshoot and because know one really knows how DHB will turn out…that’s not a take. That’s avoiding having a take.

If you think that focusing on wide receiver in the first round was a great idea, and that prioritizing speed as the top attribute at the wide receiver position is brilliant, then have a take and say that you, too, would have chosen DHB with the seventh pick in the draft.

If that’s not your take, then what is it?

I hope I’m proven wrong, and that DHB is lights out. Until then, I’ll have a take. I’ve been wrong before. I’ve been right, too. That's because I have takes, and you know where I stand, and you can look them up after the fact.

As for Mike Mitchell in the second round, well, I like the way he hits, but I think we reached in that instance, too. Again, it doesn’t mean he’s a bust. It means that I question the value we got out of that pick in the draft. We most likely could have grabbed him with our next pick.

Did I miss something? Are we not the NFL equivalent of paupers? Are we in a position to squander value?

As for the subsequent rounds, well, I'm still waiting for an offensive lineman. We did get another receiver and tight end, though, speaking of pressing needs (not).

When asked if the Raiders has considered trading down and getting DHB later in the first round, Cable said: “No, that was never the plan. We knew what we wanted to do the whole time. This was the choice that we thought we had to have to move this team to the next step.”

Now, he could be saying that because he wants to keep the kid pumped up, but he said it nonetheless. That just doesn’t sound too wise to me. Wouldn’t you at least consider it?

Anyhow, I could be wrong about all of this. I hope I am. But that’s my take as of today.

Gary, the Ravens sent the Patriots a 5th round pick (of of course, their 1st) in order to move up three slots to select OT Michael Oher. I can't believe that the Ravens, or another team, wouldn't have propositioned the Raiders to grab OT Monroe (or DT Raji or WR Crabtree) with the #7 overall pick.

Do I have proof, no. Conversely, do *you* have proof that no such offers were made? Personally, I don't know if proof on either side is ever going surface but to me, it seems a greater reach that not one team asked the Raiders to trade picks. And from the Raider perspective, it sounds like the effort was never made, although you make a good point about how it would be unwise for them to admit they tried to trade out of it. It's also possible that they DID try to trade down but didn't like what was offered to them. However, DHB fits the Raiders speedster mold so for Cable to say they wanted him from the get go really doesn't surprise me at all.

Either way, DHB is just one pick. As I mentioned at the end of the last post, four of their last six picks were never even mentioned among the 400 players that were scouted by the Sporting News in their draft guide. Is Al Davis some mad genius who knows more than everyone else? If this was the the 70's or early 80's I'd say yes. But when you've won no more than five games in the last six seasons, I'd say no. Throw in the fact that you're coming off of a year where free agent signings DeAngelo Hall, Javon Walker and Gibril Wilson turned out to be a major busts, then you have to wonder about the talent evaluation skills of this organization.

The 2009 draft makes me think that this season is going to be yet another disappointment.

"Wait-n-See" is a reasonable Take...I don't know any of these players but they are exactly what Cable said they would be before the draft ever started so it's a legitimate position and take to not the +'s and "Wait-n-See"...

Cable said...

"NO....That was never the plan"....He did NOT say we never discussed it or never entertained any offers....He just said it was never the "PLAN"...Can you posibly see any difference here....They had a "Plan" and followed threw with it...WHY....Because whatever offers that may have surfaced were NOT enough to change that "PLAN"....

I can't believe how some people try to read into everything in order to support their line of thought...Always take the negative approach to everything...

"Doom-n-Gloom"....We are losers and will always be losers and have NO hope of a recovery and this draft just proves it because....Because....We did "EXACTLY" what Cable said we would do before the freakin draft even started....

"Players NOT with the big names and NOT on other teams radar"...."Players with a go to work attitude and physical characteristics and talent that fits the Raiders criteria"....Which by the way has to do with the silly things like...

Size-Speed-Strength-Power-n-Aggression....

Oh!...But those are the traits of other players who the "Mediot"s and self-proclaimed scouts projected to be the best fit for every NFL team....

And Oh! Ya!....If those players you mentioned were so damn good and desired than why the hell did they fall so freakin far...Did "Jax" trade down when we left them on the board if there were so many offers floating around....

What-Up with all the "Crying"...Can't just get a freakin grip and deal with the reality dealt to you...It is what it is and now I'm looking forward to seeing what these players bring to the field....On the turf....NOT in some damn "Mediot"s draft guide...

Rd #6 the Raider select...A player projected to go to us in the 2nd-3rd rd...

Pick Analysis: Sulak had a lot of sacks in college and has a lot of speed. He is a hybrid-type player who lacks the size to play with his hand down full-time. He is a value pick and in the Raiders' 3-4 scheme, he will probably play strong-side linebacker

Overview A three-time All-Big 12 honoree, Sulak has the production and burst upfield to generate interest from every NFL team. He shared freshman of the year honors with tight end Chase Coffman of the Tigers, starting the final seven games of that season for Missouri and finishing with 38 tackles, 6.5 tackles for loss and four sacks. Sulak's production increased as he gained experience, topping out with eye-popping numbers as a senior -- 55 tackles, 15.5 tackles for loss, 10.5 sacks and an NCAA-leading six forced fumbles. With opposing offenses focusing much of their attention upon Missouri's other defenders, Sulak's production was inflated. Without the bulk to remain at defensive end full time in the NFL, he'll have to show he has the athleticism to make the transition to linebacker to avoid the "tweener" label.

Rd #6 Raiders Select...

6 29 Oakland (from CAR) TE Brandon Myers 6'4" 250 Iowa

Pick Analysis: Myers is more of a blocking tight end. He serves as an extra lineman more than as a pass catcher. Iowa does a great job of developing run-blocking tight ends. Myers should help the Raiders' running game.

Overview Despite signing with Iowa in 2004, Myers' career seemed at a standstill. Not even listed on the depth chart in the spring of 2006, he developed into a reliable red-zone target as a junior, scoring five touchdowns on just 21 receptions for the season. Again listed as a backup entering his senior season, Myers parlayed injuries by others and his own development into earning first-team All-Big Ten accolades. Myers isn't a special athlete, but in tying for the team lead with four receiving touchdowns in 2008, he is viewed by some as an ascending prospect. Others, however, question if his effectiveness was due to defenses stacking the line of scrimmage in an effort to slow running back Shonn Greene.

OH! NO!....The Raiders took a "TE" who is NOT fast and NOT a great athlete...

NO draft trades for Walker-n-Fargas so we will just lose them without compensation if cut...

Final Draft Grade...Totally un-known but I like the fact that they stood by what they said they were going to do and it's according to "PLAN"....So in an act of fairness I post a grade of "C"....We addressed several needs with great athletes and talent that is as yet totally un-proven so it's "Wait-n-See"....

RT,Couldn't agree more. Overall I like the guys we got but the value at which point we got them was just horrible. That includes the LB in the 4th.

I give Cincy a little credit for making 3 great picks right before us. I like to think that Al would've had his eye on at least ONE of those guys, and he hasn't completely lost his marbles. One can dream.

Seems like our first two picks were devoted Raider fans prior to this weekend. Is that what it takes for Al to draft you these days? Just be really fast and say you like the Raiders? Because if so I think I'll get into shape and start running 40's.

>>>>As I mentioned at the end of the last post, four of their last six picks were never even mentioned among the 400 players that were scouted by the Sporting News in their draft guide.>>>>

Our LAST great draft choice wasn't even listed on the CB list because I remember being pissed about it.

lol

Sure sucked that we "wasted" a first rounder on Asumughwa.

And then we have everyone complaining about what a bust our "safe" pick was in Gallery.

That's why I don't get worked up about any of this any more. I was pissed about McF last year... but if he is injury free... I will prolly be wrong about that as much as I was about Asum all those years ago.

Gary, you only quoted "I can't believe that the Ravens" but my full quote was "I can't believe that the Ravens, or another team, wouldn't have propositioned the Raiders to grab OT Monroe (or DT Raji or WR Crabtree) with the #7 overall pick."

You also say that this would have jeopardized the Raiders drafting DHB at all, however my point was that I believed SOMEONE propositioned the Raiders about trading picks. It had nothing to do with the Raiders accepting (which, of course, they didn't).

Also, Asomugha wasn't listed as a CB, he was listed at safety. But he at LEAST made the draft publications, which is more that can be said about the bulk of the Raiders draft picks.

As for Gallery, I believe that he may have succeeded on another team. I believe he was ruined by the Raiders organization and by their inability to fully develop talent...but I'll leave that for another post. LOL

So...Now I'm Speculating...If it was according to plan the plan appears to be to build a "D" that has several Blitz packages and we acquired the players who can run with it...The thought came to me when I saw it said that a player fits the Raiders 3-4 scheme as "OLB" instead of "DE" which he played in college...So now...Does anyone know if the new "DC" was known for blitzing or running a 3-4 at times....I know it was said that he had experience in several "D" schemes....

At least you'll admit that you're not crazy about the picks, but oh well, now we have to wait and see.

Gary won't go that far. He'll sling arrows at our takes, but he doesn't seem to have one himself. Does Gary think that DHB was the best receiver in the draft? Does he think that it was the best choice to prioritize the WR position over all others? Who knows? There's a lot of typing, but I'm waiting for a take.

Hey guys, BTW, who here is on Twitter or Facebook? I was on the road for most of this weekend and was looking for some fellow Raider fans to BS with about the draft, but had no one. If anyone's interested, hunt me down on Facebook (Tom Dziubek) or on Twitter (doobie77).

Please don't try to define for me what is and what is NOT a take...I'm a positive poster and as I said...I note the +'s and will "Wait-n-See" how they develop and I'm eager to see what they bring to the field on game-day...

As far as the "WR" at #7 that was my projection and desire....However I did not want to spend that value on "DHB"...Here is what I posted just prior to the draft and it speaks about that player projection....

PantyRaider said...

Well....Now several "Mock"s have the "WR"s -n- "OT" Andrade Smith falling to us at #7....Problem is most have us taking Maclin or a reach for another speed "WR"...

NOT likely as I see it....Why the hell would we reach with Boldin on a platter and Smith available....Now that would be pure stupidity and NOT something "MrD" will do....He has never been that damn "Brain Dead"...

PantyRaider...NO Screws Loose!!!/_2:24 AM

So as you can see I was speaking against a reach for "DHB"...And as you well know I was wrong...We did exactly that...So was it according to "PLAN"....It surly appears to be...

RT, I wanted Monroe with that pick... but I said weeks ago that I wasn't going to get all wrapped up into this. I will go back and dig it up for you if you don't believe me.

So my TAKE is just that... I don't understand why people get all pissed off about something that is now, and always has been a crapshoot. I was pissed about picking McF last year, and if he remains injury free this year, I could already be his biggest fan... so what good did it do me? I could be wrong in just one year.

My Take is also I don't think its fair that people make stuff up and keep repeating it like it is truth.

Nobody will ever know if we were offered a trade down... so why make that assertion? Every person directly involved in the draft is going to say the exact same thing... we got exactly what we wanted, and we wouldn't change a thing.

How can anybody even suggest something different with a straight face?

And for a person that pretty much disappeared here for two frigging months, I don't think you should be lecturing ANYONE here on what our takes should or shouldn't be.

"Wait-n-See" denotes my attitude on the matter instead of the attitude of "Doom-n-Gloom"...

If after they take the field they are unproductive and lack talent than I will know of it and post accordingly...At this point I know exactly nothing about any of these players but hope the hell Cable knows what the fuck he is doing...

All I can do at this point in time is trust my Captain (Coach) and that's what I was trained to do with respect...I get up-set like everyone else but I don't stray far from my training...That's who I am as a man...As a Captain myself...Faithful onto death and I have faced that several times...Just as I'm also faithful in love and the Raiders are very dear to me...

Not to go off on NON sports comments but we are who we are...

Some are faithless and blame their gods if things don't appear the way they like...Others continue to support a political party even after seeing their leaders continue to do despicable things to humanity...Some jump ship and turn to whoever is winning at the time...

Gary,The "Value" I was referring to is this. Not one other team was going to take Heyward Bey before Crabtree or even Maclin. If you want to put an exact "value" on this then here you go.

We passed on Crabtree. There is no way Crabtree makes it out of the top 10 and we were in a prime spot to sell to the highest bidder, or to whomever wanted to get into that spot for a different guy such as Monroe.

Given the fact that a "better" talent in Maclin fell all the way to 19th tells me that Heyward Bey would NOT have gone before that pick, and any legit draft expert could've told you that before hand.

So how much do you think we could've gotten from some team for moving to let's say, #10 (obviously the 49ers were high on Crabtree)? An extra 2nd round pick minimum? That could've been Max Unger right there. That is "Value"

How much do you think we could've gotten to move down to #19? A 1st rounder maybe this year AND next year?

That is the "Value" we passes up, in the first round alone. Not to mention we could've waited a full two rounds to get our 2nd round pick, and we could've used it on actually protecting our QB.

What's the "value" of having a protected QB who doesn't end up on IR because we weren't serious about blocking for him?

Did you ever wonder if Al would have done any worse if he had stumbled into the war room five minutes before the draft started, three beers into a six-pack, pulling a Pro Football Weekly draft guide out of a Barnes & Noble bag? If so, he just might have drafted Monroe and Brace. Something to think about when evaluating the current Raider brain trust.

PS, it'd be even funnier if there were shots of him running up to Goodell, pointing at a page in the book and having Roger reply, "sorry Al, the Cardinals took him in the 2nd round".

...Could someone please explain to me what "value" means in something as un-exact of a science as drafting?...

I think it's likely the Niners would have moved 3 spots for a 7th round pick. That's not much of a cost for them, and guarantees they get Crabtree. For the Raiders, it's zero cost (because Bey will still be there) and nets another draft pick.

So in this hypothetical, the #7 pick is worth Bey and a 7th round pick. And we got Bey out of it. We left a low round draft pick on the table.

Same with Mitchell. We traded down and picked up a 4th and a 6th. We used the lower 2nd rounder on Mitchell, but we could have used the 4th, and used the 2nd to get a better player.

When you rate someone vastly higher than everyone else, you spend a draft pick you didn't need to in order to get him.

(From the last thread, to Calico Jack) Hey, I found a first-round receiver THIS YEAR taken in the first round that had less than 50 receptions, Calico, and I can't believe I didn't think of it sooner...as a Gators fan I should have realized earlier that Percy Harvin had ONLY 40 last year. So that means that he sucks and can't play right? Or is it because of the system he was in? I hope you realize now what an idiotic point you made.

(From the last thread again) Roy-

You may be so bold, and I understand where you're coming from on the size/speed angle. But I just don't see this year as a mirror of recent years, excepting Nnamdi Asomugha. Sure, they may have been superficially similar, but look at Huff: heralded prospect, the "safe" "common sense" choice. Gallery, safe, common sense, can't miss. Russell, can't miss, "have to" pick. You definitely aren't wrong that the Raiders value size and speed in the draft, but I say "what's the matter with size and speed"? It mystifies me that fans can watch "NFL ready" player after player fall on their ass in the pros and still think "polish" is so important to a draft. It's equally interesting that the meme seem to be "speed doesn't matter" when the Patriots ran over everybody in the NFL two years ago on the backs of the two fastest receivers in football.

I'll take a more talented player who listens to their coaches over an "NFL ready" player who thinks they know it already. Jamarcus Russell's development was stunted for quite a while because he thought he knew better than his coaches, and I'll almost guarantee you it was the "NFL ready" label that played a big part in that.

Now on to The Man Himself:

"Saying that I shouldn’t be disappointed because the draft is ultimately a crapshoot and because know one really knows how DHB will turn out…that’s not a take. That’s avoiding having a take."

I like your thoughts and I really admire your writing style and eloquence, but you really seem to struggle with handling criticism. When somebody doesn't agree with you, you get defensive, invent arguments nobody made, and develop a persecution complex. Nobody said you shouldn't be anything. And I at least gave about 7,000 other reasons why I thought the draft was good. You just chose to ignore them.

"As for Mike Mitchell in the second round, well, I like the way he hits, but I think we reached in that instance, too. Again, it doesn’t mean he’s a bust. It means that I question the value we got out of that pick in the draft. We most likely could have grabbed him with out next pick."

Can I start a chorus up? Let's all chime in: NO...WE...COULDN'T. I realize Mel Kiper is always right and the fact that he'd never heard of Mike Mitchell means he wasn't going to be drafted until the sixth round, but the Bears and the Cowboys were interested in him IN THE SECOND ROUND. The Bears were going with him before we scooped him up. So unless you think we should have traded from 47 to 48, we probably wouldn't have gotten him. See what knowing shit before you talk about it gets you?

Panty,I'm aware of Al's time honored traditions. But frankly I'm tired of being stuck in the past. This draft is a shining example of why these methods don't work, or at least don't work today. Are we so stuck in our ways that we're just completely oblivious to common sense? Because what I saw was "REACH". You were saying it yourself as it happened, remember?

We'll be forced to pay Heyward Bey accordingly for a #7 drafted WR. If we'd done the right thing and gotten our guy later in the round, not only could he have gotten extra pick and possibly proven players, we could've saved considerable money on our prized new toy.

There was talk throughout the 1st round about the possibility of teams purposely exceeding their time limits because they knew they could still get their guy for a cheaper salary. Nobody did it but it's a nice thought. I wish we'd done it, at the very least.

The money we're going to pay this guy will be ridiculous for what he's done up to this point.

Pat, I think there's always going to be a "bust" possibility with just about any draft pick. The consensus isn't always going to be right, but they more than often have a decent sense of evaluating talent. I also think that if the Raiders had experience SOME modicum of success over the last few years, this draft would be excusable...maybe Al and company WERE on to something with these mysterious draft picks. However, the results are more like this:

2003: 4-122004: 5-112005: 4-122006: 2-142007: 4-122008: 5-11

Each poor season means a better draft pick in the following year's draft. With the exception of 2005 (Randy Moss trade) this team had a top seven overall pick in each of the subsequent drafts. Likewise, they also had high draft slots in the other rounds as well. Despite all this, the Raiders have been unable to win more than FIVE games since 2002.

So how can a team with six years of excellent draft positions be so consistently bad? To me, it's Occum's Razor, i.e. "The simplest explanation is usually the best one."

These stats tell me one of two basic things.

1. This team is poor at evaluating talent

and/or

2. This team is poor at developing talent.

If the Raiders were putting up winning seasons with their drafted players excelling and leading the way, I wouldn't put too much into this draft because, apparently, the Raiders know what they're doing. However, the Raiders are not that team. And when I see a team so wrought with futility making very questionable draft day decisions, I just can't see the positive angle on it.

Yes....I thought it was a rediculas reach and would never happen....I was also very pissed off when it did happen and spoke as such...I was in depression about the 1st days picks and so stated and proceeded to consume cheap beer here in Bangkok....

Than I slept on it and came to grips with the reality of what is the Raiders and realized there was a plan...Now I'm trying to understand that plan and see where it takes us and I'm intrigued and waiting to see it on the field...

I referenced these past picks not to show that any player can be a bust, but to argue that this draft was anything but business as usual, remember I was responding to somebody from the other thread. With the exception of Nnamdi, every other one of our recent top picks were big-name picks with loads of accolades and "polish". That includes McFadden, and I don't think he's a bust, at least not yet.

Gary, I'm sorry I took two months off during a time of year when you and several others say there's really nothing to discuss because it's all speculation and we can't possibly know anything going on in the inside and there's no point in getting too worked up about any of this, anyway.

Based on your comments today, I should take the next two months off, too. After all, what's the point of discussing or questioning the draft?

I'm that guy with a delayed reaction...At first I just sat there like..."What the fuck just happened"....Than I heard it again on BSPN Radio and just started to break-down but sense I'm in a hotel in Bangkok with my young wife I had to tone it down and hold it in....So I just started to consume cheap beer....Singha...

At the time I had just posted the "Crab" going to the Raiders at #7 and than was going to watch it happen for real...What a freakin shock...Here is what I posted...

PantyRaider said... The Oakland Raiders select....

Micheal the "Crab"...."WR"....

Horay!...Horay!....

I picked it 3 years in a row....

PantyRaider....Lovin Ya Al!!!/_

1:55 PM

You can just imagine how much of a let-down that was...I posted early to be the 1st to have it up and than came da "Bomb"....Exploding Heart...

Psycho....

My first reaction was to the shock of what happened when I was totally unprepared for it...What I feel now is to the realization that this is exactly what Cable was talking about so there is a plan and now I desperately desire to understand that plan...

That's why as I stated a few post ago it appears we may be building for a blitzing "D" according to the players selected who have tremendous speed and physical ability and love to get after the "QB"s...

If you'll recall Brady Quinn had the "NFL ready" tag coming out of college. Russell had the "upside" tag.

Also, how do you know that "Jamarcus Russell's development was stunted for quite a while because he thought he knew better than his coaches, and I'll almost guarantee you it was the "NFL ready" label that played a big part in that."

Are you sure that was not more a result of a HC who opted for a rush heavy offense with minimal passing(Kiffin)?

I know because I remember Kiffin saying that he thought Jamarcus wasn't listening to the coaches about things like mechanics, reading the play, all the things that go into NFL quarterbacks because he seemed to believe he was already there. I think I remember him talking about "tearing him down and building him back up". And I don't know about before the draft, I didn't invest too much time looking at it that year, but after the draft I remember the general consensus that he was the "have-to" pick; that he played against SEC defenses and was more ready for the NFL than Brady Quinn.

Rich Eisen of NFL Network asked Former Raider HC Jon Gruden, what were the Raiders thinking if anything when they drafted this time.

“Let me tell you like this, as a former Raider. And this is true; the Oakland Raiders are a global football team. They are recognized around the world. I've been to Europe there's Raider fans. There’s a ton of Raider fans around the world and that's a fact. Al Davis loves the Oakland Raiders. And I know this for a fact. He could care less of what any of us think and that's a fact."

"Does he care, does Al Davis care about what he is doing to this team" asked Eisen

“He wants to win," said Jon Gruden on the NFL Network Post-Draft show.

The only thought comes to mind is, “Ok, but Al has been saying this yearly and nothing gets done.” But it doesn't seem like it to us fans. You can spin it whichever way you like or don't like. The fact of the matter is; this was one of the worst drafts for this storied franchise. End of story.

Al always drafts who he wants. End of story. Cable doesn't have the proper staff around him or lack of knowledge himself to argue with Al about better prospects for the Raiders.

Our scouting team...hmmmm.. Is there one in Alameda because they failed to do their jobs. I am disappointed that Cable and staff weren't better prepared or informed enough to fight for quality players with Al.

Mel Kiper Jr, Todd McShay and Mike Maylock and all the other so call Football Draft Guru's have had horrible mock drafts or scouting the right players for years and the majority of them have said this player would be great or this one is the safest pick.... Most of those picks have never panned out.

They of course didn’t bash any of the other teams horrible selections, but when you are the Raiders, its just a given that you’ll be bashed inside and out.

Take- Great to see you back again. It's been a very long time since I have written anything on RT, but I have kept track of everyone's comments and stories along the way for the past few months.

Take, glad to hear it. I can sympathize about writing styles not translating sometimes. I can often seem abrasive and curt when I communicate on the internet, even though I actually speak in a very low-key, though pointed and emphatic manner. And know, I don't want you to go away for another two months. I'm not embarrassed to say I was actually a little worried you weren't coming back. :)

I'll take a stab at your questions:

"Feels that DHB was the best wide receiver available in the draft?"

Honestly, I really do. The value thing is potentially arguable, but I think we really did get the best wideout in the draft, that I'm almost certain of. And it's not just because I was nervous about Crabtree's potential. Heyward-Bey has all the necessary physical gifts, and a great head to go along with it. I think he's a slam dunk, and the only thing that kept him from being ranked higher than Maclin at least, were his numbers and his team.

"Feels that it was a good decision to prioritize the WR position over all others in the first round?"

This is definitely a bit harder for me to give a sure answer on. It's hard to say. I do think we needed a marquee wideout and Heyward-Bey was the right choice, but there were definitely some great players that it's hard to argue against, and the Raiders obviously have more than one position that needs addressing. I think whether or not you think we should have gone elsewhere in round one depends on whether or not you think the majority of our problems have been personnel or coaching. Cable seems to think he can whip the o-line and d-line into shape, and they did sort of address those needs in a roundabout way with Brandon Myers, Sulak, Norris, and Shaughnessy. Plus, we stole an excellent undrafted player in Frantz Joseph.

That defensive work is pretty much in keeping with the Raiders' free agency period, stacking the team with versatile role players. I think you can do that more on o-line and defense, where it's more about a core of players working in conjunction. I'd throw my money at the big-play wideouts, QB's and running backs, where it's a lot harder to gauge potential success and the truly spectacular players are fewer and far between.

"Q: People would call DHB and Mitchell classic size-speed-weight Al Davis picks. Are they Cable picks too? Did you two sell each other on picks?"

Cable: "We actually had a plan early that we would go out and kind of target the first couple of rounds separately and see where we’re at. The thing was we had one wanted in the first and that was Darrius without question. And two, we both had the same two guys. And it was the same position, we knew who they were, we knew what we wanted to do. So when they both hit it really was kind of unique because we had agreed that’s where we were at. Very much together in it and the rest kind of took care of itself. I think when you look at the draft, the characteristics of the player, athletically, size, speed numbers and all that. Certainly those are Oakland raider numbers, Al davis numbers and all that. At the same time the other things that go with it, my name’s right there with it."

So there you go. You think this draft was horrible, fine. That's a perfectly reasonable position to take. It's not a particularly inspired or original one, but it's reasonable. But I am so sick of this assumption that it was all Al Davis, and Tom Cable is just the helpless victim. You want to blame somebody, give %50 to Tom Cable, and %50 to Al Davis. That's straight from the horse's mouth. And if you make some moronic point about how this is all some big phony put-on, I'm going to fucking scream. Does anybody realize that that's exactly the logic that nutjobs who believe in Reptilians and drone planes on 9/11 use? Any evidence that contradicts the conspiracy is part of the conspiracy. "Of course he'd say that, he's in on it!"

The 2009 draft is over. For better or worse these rookies are Raiders now. Time to call in some of those undrafted free agents and get the competition going in the minicamp. See if we can fill any holes not filled by the draft. JaMarcus, meet Darrius. Darrius, go deep. James Lofton, report to the practice field, we've got receivers for you to work with. He is still on staff, isn't he?

"Still waiting. The larger point I was trying to convey that went right over your head is the fact that is highly unusual for the 1st WR taken in the draft to have such meager stats regardless of the system, team, or circumstances. It is the equivalent of a RB taken in the Top 10 who didn't bang out 1000 yards. If you, or anyone on this board, can name a WR taken so high with less than 50 WRs, I'm all ears. Like anything, there are always going to be exceptions. The question is whether or not you are comfortable with rolling the dice on such an exception with the #7 pick in the draft."

You point out Percy Harvin. Brilliant!

Here's where your reference to Harvin makes no sense:

#1: Percy Harvin missed 2 games due to injury

#2 For all practical purposes was a PT WR and PT RB. In addition to the 40 recpetions, he ran the ball 70 times for 659 yards. That is 110 touches.

#3 Harvin was the 4th WR taken and the #22 selection ... a HUGE difference between the 1st WR taken and #7 pick.

Sorry Pat but you need to dig deeper if you want to be taken seriously.

Good job RT with fleshing out the discussion. I have always enjoyed a spirited, yet respectful debate.

My take on DHB:

DHB, according to Cable, is going to be used as a weapon in terms of "stretching the field and throwing the ball over the heads of the defenders" meaning a return to some degree to the "vertical offense".

Here's where I believe this is a mistake. In my estimation, one of the chief reasons DHB was drafted was his impressive 40 yard time. Debate this all you want but if he runs a 4.5 he isn't on the Raider radar.

Granted, this guy can fly. The problem I see is when you draft a player so high who supposedly will make the vertical offense a staple of your offense.

News Flash: The vertical offense is severely flawed in todays NFL. 7 step drops, 5 seconds for the QB, and chuck it down field simply doesn't work in today's game.

In todays game, the passing offense is read & react with the QB getting rid of the football in 2 seconds. Why? Because opponent's D use comlex, vaired, exotic blitz packages to get after the QB.

Now before some of you get things twisted, I'm not implying that the deep ball can't be used as an effectively tool in the playbook. However, in the larger context of an offense, it is only a handful of plays at best. If you run 60 offensive snaps in a game, you might get an opportunity to go deep 2,3,4 times. That is what, 5% of your playbook.

Getting back to DHB. His speed and use in the vertical offense sounds great on the surface. When you really think about it, does it honestly make sense to draft a player so high whose main attribute is getting deep?

Regardless of his "warp speed", fly patterns are not such a great weapon when either you've got a deep safety waiting for him or a QB on his back because the line couldn't hold off the D for 5 alligators.

Does anyone disagree that the short and intermediate patterns are the bread and butter of an effective passing game?

Wouldn't it make more sense to draft a WR who will readily be incorporated into the staple of your offense. Crabtree, Harvin, Hicks, Maclin are far more capable at running the short to intermediate patterns than DHB.

Hey, I finally found the article I was looking for, so I want to once-and-for-all refute something somebody mentioned over here, the genuinely weird idea that Michael Crabtree looked in the slightest bit pleased when the Raiders passed on him. I was watching the draft, and saw the tears in his eyes and the puffed out lower lip. He looked like he was about to break down. I think some of y'all may have exposed that you didn't actually watch the draft and just watched the ESPN highlights, in which they misleadingly and unethically cut footage of Crabtree celebrating his selection with the announcement of Heyward-Bey. I'm not sure who they were trying to make look bad, but it's probably the Raiders.

But I thought maybe I'd gone temporarily insane until I read this article, but then I couldn't find it as it got buried under draft news. This was the quote I wanted:

From Aaron Curry: "It was the talk of the room when that happened," Curry said. "Everyone, as far as the players were concerned, were shocked. Knowing Darrius, he is very happy that he just kind of kept quiet and slipped in there as the top receiver. Knowing Michael, he will set out to prove that was the mistake of the entire draft."

And, proving I wasn't insane, the article also says this:

"Crabtree's eyes were moist in the players' draft Green Room when the Raiders passed on him, ensuring he would not be the first receiver selected."

So is that it? Can we finally put the issue of Michael Crabtree's undying hatred of the Raiders to bed?

Uh-huh. Count 'em up, baby. I wouldn't have picked Harvin if I didn't know it was 12. The Gators played 14 games last year. You're talking to a Gators fan, here. By the way, I don't know the circumstances but Heyward-Bey also missed a game last season.

"#2 For all practical purposes was a PT WR and PT RB. In addition to the 40 recpetions, he ran the ball 70 times for 659 yards. That is 110 touches."

Here come the qualifiers. "Oh no, what I really meant was that you can't find a receiver with less than 50 catches in 12 games in the first round who was often used in the running game". You set the criteria, I met it. Don't change the rules now that you realized how stupid your point was. All you've done by reciting to me Percy Harvin's stat line is show how the number of receptions he has isn't indicative of his skill, because of the system he was in. Which is pretty much my whole point.

"#3 Harvin was the 4th WR taken and the #22 selection ... a HUGE difference between the 1st WR taken and #7 pick.

Sorry Pat but you need to dig deeper if you want to be taken seriously."

Right. Only your argument was that never, ever, would a team possibly be stupid enough to draft somebody who had less than 50 catches in a season...except for the team that got the most important player in college football last year, who happened to get less catches than he normally would because of the system. This is more goalposts-moving dishonesty from you.

And please, please, stop with the "sorry-ing". It's an incredibly obnoxious passive-aggressive trait.Don't apologize to me.

He is only one "WR" NOT the whole core...If "DHB" goes deep it clears out underneath for the intermediate and short routs by the "WR"s -n- "TE" -n- "RB" coming out of the back-field so that argument is just totally flawed...

He was drafted to fit a situation...And that situation can be present for far more than 3-5 plays per game...That "V-O" goes deep repeatedly but only passes the ball when the player has separation...But the ball is pumped in that direction anyway...

With the speed of this guy it won't take 5 ticks to develop that rout....It can be hit much quicker or it can be stretched as a result of "JRus"s powerful arm...It can be a timing rout or it can be a check-down to that rout after pumping the ball at another "WR"...

Also the speed "WR" can cut his rout off and cross while another "WR" turns up-field and goes deep thus creating a situation where the speed guy becomes open underneath or the other becomes open deep...The "DB"s expect and anticipate so when they bite on the fly a cut-off creates immediate separation....This can also be a timing pattern because only the "O" knows what is about to be run....

With the versatility that this team now has a great deal or creativity is possible and we already know Cable likes that stuff and so do the players....The "V-O" does not have to be vanilla like what Shell tried to bring back without the weapons in place...We now have all the weapons to run it....

I didn't have a lot of time to follow the draft over the weekend, so I will be catching up. Life happens sometimes.

Just the parts of Cables press conference I have read, he says "I" and "me" a lot. Even stated a month ago this was the guy "I" wanted not "We" wanted.

That's not a defense of Cable, just what I read in the article. I personally wanted Oher. So, from that standpoint I'm disappointed.

I do find it amusing that some BSPN clown would declare the guy and immediate bust. That's more of an "I know everything there is to know about football players" attitude. Kind of reminded me of Jonesy. I think I'll declare everyone in the first round a bust. That way in four years I can say "see how right I was." Come back it two or three years, that's when you judge a draft.

I would agree with Panty a bit on the vertacality of the pick. It does open up the underneath stuff. Setting the table so to speak. Cable also said he needed someone who could go get the ball when Russell cranks it up. And, I don't think we have anyone on the roster currently who can do that.

He was pretty good on the end around, with 202 yards on 15 carries. We didn't do well in that area last year. Only a couple of successes.

Calico, Cable also said of the top 4 he thought Darrius was the best route runner of the group. I'll just take him at his word on that one. Further, a guy who can go vertical is still spreading the field, it's just spreading it vertically and not horizontally as in the WC offense. If he catches a few deep ones, the free safety is going to have to account for him every passing play.

For now I'm going to assume his "inconsistant" hands as stated in the media were more a product of bad QB play. Maryland's quarterbacks weren't that good. They threw almost as many interceptions (13) as TD's (15)

Mitchell the 2nd round safety was quoted in an article that he liked to play safety like Jack Tatum. I think he's a little too young to have seen Tatum play (unless you believe in reincarnation), and I don't know who filled him in and showed him the film.

It was rumored that Walter and Fargas were offered up for trade, but no takers. At least not for the asking price.

Buttery Pat - A Gator fan? Man, I was just starting to like you. Oh well, see you in the SEC Championship game again next year.

Not much else to say except, lets get them signed, get on with the OTA's and see what falls our.

The Raiders haven't drafted O-linemen in two years, and only Mario Henderson in the last three years.

There has been no DTs selected by the Raiders since Hawthorne in the 6th Rd of 2005, and none before that since 2000.

Am I missing something here? Are the Raiders that set at OT and DT that they don't need to draft any?

The draft is unquestionably the key to any team's long-term success. However, I think if you look deep enough you might find some twisted aversion to drafting tackles may have contributed to the Raiders' last six years of misery.

Folks, you get out what you put in, and the Raiders simply have not drafted in the trenches...

The draft is definitely one way to build a team for the future...However...There is also "FA" where a team can be rebuilt quickly with "Vet" help that has already proven itself to some degree in the NFL....

Now...As regards "FA"...Where has the bulk of the money been spent in recent years....

"DT"-"DE"-"OT"-"C" for the trenches...

"OLB"-n-"LB" + "CB"-n-"S"..."D".."QB"-n-"WR"-n-"RB"..."O"....

Now we are concentrating on the draft to rebuild our "QB"-n-"RB"s-n-"WR"s..."O"..

"DE-OLB"s-n-"LB"s-n-"S"s-n-"CB"s..."D"...

But we continue to address the "OT"-n-"C" with "FA" as well as the "DT"s....

Now please explain to me what you see so bad in this...We have only 5-7 draft picks per season and only the 1st 4 are expected to produce possible starters consistently...While with "FA" one expects to acquire a starter with each pick and there is no limit on how many a team can take as long as they have the $$$ to pay for it...

Lord...I wish when someone wants to start an argument that they at least think it threw and anticipate the reply so it would at least appear to be challenging....

My take(s):On not getting to upset over the picks: Why can't that be a take? My take is that every single teams staff has WAY more information on the draftee's and thier teams than I do, so I can take a pick I didn't approve of with a grain of salt, and see how it pans out. I also think the voting should have an obstain option so my voice can be heard if I don't want to vote for either of the douche bags.

On DHB at 7, and options to trade down:First, nobody wants to trade into the top ten. And if you go past 20 or beyond you run the risk of not getting your guy. The Walsh quote pretty much covers it. I can't wait to see us line up in the I, and then have McFadden split wide and him and DHB streak both sides. Talk about speed going deep. Same thing with Mitchel. He's the guy we wanted, so we got him (special teams is getting a big boost with this draft).

On the TE, we needed another tight end that can block so Zach can get more touches. Big upside on Zach is he can catch AND block, but he had to block more often than not (sure the OL was a problem there also, but I think the Raging Mullet is gonna come back strong).

On another note, someone said about the DHB pick we are going to overpay for someone who has done nothing to deserve it (not exact quote). NONE of the players have done anything in the NFL, so to me, all those first round picks are way overpaid. I think negotions with DHB will be easier and he'll probably take just a little less than say Crabtree would have (i.e., "thanks for taking me so high"). JMHO.

And finally, WTF is this statement all about?"Jamarcus Russell's development was stunted for quite a while because he thought he knew better than his coaches,"

How did you come up with this? His developement was stunted by his agent and Kiffen.

NY, if you look at Shanni, he rarely picked any linemen early for his ZBS either... and they always had one of the best lines. Now I made the argument that maybe we should just get ZBS linemen for all positions BUT the LT, but I don't coach in the NFL.

The ZBS means you can spend your money elsewhere.

>>>>Pat: A guy like Gary is shocked that some of us might be pissed off about this draft.>>>>

Well for one thing... most of my ire was for the ding-dongs "pissed off" because they thought we should have traded down. Anyone that follows the NFL should know that except for a QB, nobody ever trades into the top ten because it costs too much. Name the last team to trade into the top ten for anything besides a QB, and then perhaps there is an actual POINT to being pissed off?

Secondly, the Raiders needed a WR... there were 4 of them picked in the top 22. If you look at the history of WR's in the draft, at least two of them will be busts, maybe three (ask Detroit.) So how does any of us know that Bey is a bust and the other three will be stars?? I'd say he has the exact same chance of busting as the other three.

Yes...Size-Speed-n-other physical attributes certainly do apply especially when drafting a top prospect with your 1st pick or 2...

So...Now what are you advocating here...That somehow we should look at an undersized and slow "DT" who was able to produce at the college level as our #1 pick....Or that short squaty "CB" that can't cover the big "WR"s now entering the NFL...Or maybe that short "WR" that put up all those big #'s for some small college in a very weak conference....

Goo-Golly Man....Get a grip....Size-n-Speed along with other physical attributes are key to advance into the NFL with very damn few exception....Such as a "QB" named Doug Flutie who was too short and never drafted but when he finally got his chance he shined shined shined....So now you can bash every freaking team in the NFL because they all passed on the bastard....

Just for a small piece of information...At the combine and personnel work-outs those physical attributes are what is measured in every player who attends....Now why do you suppose that happens....

...oh, others are pissed off because of "value". I am still waiting for someone to quantify exactly how value can be determined until we see these players actually play in the NFL for like 4 years.

So does this about cover it? People are pissed off because we didn't trade down (when it was impossible to do so) people are pissed off because we didn't get the right WR (how anyone is supposed to know which will be the best is anyone's guess) or people are pissed off because of "value" when it cannot be defined.

And I am the one that is crazy here?

As Jmac said today, the Raiders are getting tagged as morons because we have been losing for 6 straight years... if Bellichick had made the same picks he would have been deemed a genius.

Ya!...Just look at the "Rat" Shany...He was labeled Genius and made several big mistakes but always got the benefit of the doubt until the very end...Marice Clarett was just too big a dumper pick...But even than as he was pushed out the door "Medoits" cam to his rescue say it was such a shame to happen to such a great coach...

What was Jerry Rice? Wasn't he like a middle or late round pick? Would he have been a crappy value if the 9ers drafted him in the first round?

The obvious bottom line is that no one can determine the value of where a player was drafted until that player has had the opportunity to earn a spot on the roster.

That said, while I would have gone either OT or DE/DT with the first pick, obviously the Raiders felt they needed Heyward-Bey of the three receivers at the top of the draft. But just because that's the way I would have gone doesn't mean that the Raiders made the wrong pick. It's fine to have an opinion, but the opinion just flutters in the wind until the season starts.

At somepoint in the last couple of weeks, I said that if the Raiders choose a WR, it shouldn't be Crabtree because McFadden brings the same skills to the table. I said is shouldn't be Maclin, because Higgins brings the same skills to the table. I said it should be someone with speed and height who can be a posession receiver and occasionally burn the defense on a fly pattern.

Of the three WRs at the top of the draft, DHB is the closest fit, so I believe, to that extent, my thinking was mirroring the Raiders. I did feel that if the Raiders were to go in that direction, they'd address it in the 2nd or 3rd round.

The knock on DHB is his hands. I know another WR who was called a bust the day he was drafted because of "bad hands." Cliff Branch.

My biggest concern about this draft was not who we would wind up picking. My biggest concern was the last several years we've apparently had of draft day drama. Will Davis and the HC be on the same page? Tom Cable is, as always, upbeat, which says nothing.

Right now, I'm perfectly willing to let this draft stand on it's own until results come in.

I will say that I do like the undrafted FAs we're already bringing in, and I predict we'll find a keeper or two.

The reason that DHB has the "bad hands" rap is not because he has a large number of drops, but because he has a low number of receptions. DHB has been working out of a system that runs the ball. And that's what the Raiders do - run the ball. I'd argue that of the three WRs at the top of the chart, DHB is the closest system fit.

While Mitchel is also called a bust in advance, that's really kind of stupid. Mitchel was racing up everbody's charts for the past month. He's a head hunter with blazing speed. That's right - HE HITS! Kind of what everyone around these parts wanted to see? No? I guess because he has the speed that Al loves, that disqualifies him. We should have picked a slow SS who can hit.

Well, I've read what Cable has to say, and you either chose to believe him or you don't. He seemed very ready to talk about what DHB brings to the table, so I at least have to believe that he was on board with the pick.

He said they never considered trading down, because they thought he'd be gone later. I know for a fact that the Giants were ready to trade up to #14 to get him as a replacement for Burress. But the Giants have been to a SB recently, so if they picked him at #14 the pick would have been brilliant.

Folks, what it comes down to is Al Davis'/Tom Cable's judgment vs. Mel Kiper's. Take and Calico and others are on board with Mel Kiper. I'll tell you what... I'll accept AD's and TC's judgment, and we'll see how it all pans out.

That fabulous Hall of Famer Al Toon went ahead of Rice at 10 in the 1985 draft. This from NFL.com draft history. Rice also won rookie of the year for 1985.

But, to your point, it's not where you are taken. It's how you fit within the team and what your production is.

From some of the pre-draft articles I have seen, Darrius (easier to type as opposed to his last name) is an over achiever. He's been told all his life he didn't have it. Whatever "it" is.

He might be a bust, so might Stafford or Oher, the guy I wanted.The fact is we probably won't know for at least two seasons. Hell, Nnamdi was labled an instant bust. That was echoed his first two seasons.

As I stated berore Cable said he was the guy "I" wanted. If he wasn't on board why would he use "I" and not "We".

On Friday night the NFL Network was running a show on the top ten draft steals. Guess who number 8 was. Someone named Ray Guy. Al was called several kinds of idiots for that pick. The real travesty is he isn't in the Hall of Fame.

H, according to Cable they picked DHB for all of the reasons I speculated. He's the best system fit, and he brings something to the table we don't already have.

The key factor, according to Cable, is that of the top WRs, DHB was the ONLY one opperating in a pro style system. As for Crabtree, he opperated in a spread and was looking for the ball on litterally every play. If Crabtree had DHB numbers under those conditions, nobody would be interested in Crabtree.

Cable has been looking for two primary characteristics for bringing players on to this team, and I'm remaining on board with that plan. He wants players who WANT TO BE HERE and he wants players with a HIGH LEARNING CURVE. Tom Cable says that player is DHB, and not Crabtree. He also seems to think that his O-line is solid enough.

Mitchel was a bust until they found out the Bears were ready to pull the trigger on Mitchel a couple of picks later (and, of course, if the Bears had done so, it would have been brilliant). So at that point Maycock had to appologize to Mitchel for saying nobody would have picked him until the 4th or 5th rounds.

After reading post after post after post after post by Panty, Gary,H, Buttercup, Blanda.....

Their brainwashing really works. I just can't believe how lucky we are to get the guys AD wanted with Cable right there to help him. THEY HAVE A PLAN, oh praise the Lord they have a plan. If we had the first pick overall, AD better have taken DHB, he will make everyone else BETTER. Come on, he is almost 6'2" and can run, what else do you need to be a star in the NFL. Am I missing something here? The guy is a workoutaholic, of course he should have been picked 7th overall and would have been 1st overall if we had the 1st pick. All these other teams who think they know a good player, Pfffft. If they are so good, why did they pass up on DHB?

Look at Aso, they said he should have been a 2nd rd pick and AD took him in the 1st, is he lousy? Well? So there ya go, just more proof that DHB is going to be great.Mitchell...so what if he played teirII football, hitting guys in the NFL isn't any different than hitting those guys. We should have traded up in the 1st round just to have been sure to get him. WHEW, lucky we have AD though, he probably snookered all the other teams and distracted them from taking Mitchell. He knows his stuff.

All the other teams must be so envious because they missed out on the 2 best in the draft,AD took them from right under their noses.

What is this value in the draft nonsense? As long as you get the fastest players, it doesn't matter where you pick them, am I missing something here???????

My father once said to me when I was a know it all teenager, "Why don't you go out and get a job while you still know EVERYTHING."

I think you need to call BSPN and NFL Network and inform them of your brilliance. Those guys do this stuff 24-7 and they are no more accurate than your average 1960's TV weatherman trying to do a 10 day forecast. Take your alterego Stainedshorts with you to your interview.

If you actually came in with something other than the "I know everything" attitude you might actually be taken seriously.

Take, Calico, NY all present their reasoned arguments without all the histronics, breath holding and feet stomping of your entries.

Try that approach sometime, if you have it in you. No one is going to know how this, or any draft until two years after it occurs.

I am so hyped, this is the best draft the world has ever seen. Only the Great Al Davis could see this, he truly is genius. Who esle would have gotten these players the way Al Davis did? WHO?

For all you haters, what do you know, Al Davis has farted more than you know so shut the fuck up. i'm telling you right now, the Raiders are going to win it ALL. Go to Vegas, bet your house on it, the Raiders will be the first team to set a record for losing and then win it all in the next year. This is all due to the Great Al Davis and THE BEST DRAFT EVER!!!!!!

Thank you for blessing me with your great reply, I know, you are right, I am now brainwashed.

I now believe everything you and Blanda and Panty and Gary write, you guys KNOW it all. How can anyone be so dumb, like I was, to see it any other way? I now bow at your feet as I do to the Great Al Davis. I have been saved, so thank from the bottom of my heart H, you showed me the way.

P.S. Couldn't have done it without help from p, g, B and company, keep up the great work guys.

Regarding why I didn't think Crabtree was a good fit. It's true, Crabtree's catches have been numerous indeed. But from the clips I saw, a very large number of those receptions were essentially forward hand-offs, where Crabtree took advantage of a confused defense near the line of scrimmage and broke out for a large gain. This is exactly the same kind of thing that McFadden is capable of, and we've seen Higgins do it toward the end of last season. DHB possesses the size and athleticism to go over the top for balls AND to stretch the field.

The ability of Crabtree OR Maclin to perform in an NFL style offense has not yet been tested, where DHB his been tested.

Still, I did not expect that WR would be the Raiders first stop in the NFL draft. But it appears from some of Cable's comments that Walker may still be a question mark for 2009. They would have been forced to address that in either FA or the draft - they chose the draft.

It is great that DBH is now on board to stretch the field. I need to ask you, seeing as you know how the Raiders go, how is he going to fit into Al's and Cable's/ West Coast offense? Like the one Ken Stabler used to play in. He just doesn't seem to fit into that dink and dunk kind of offense..... sumwhat confused again.

"You do what you’re assigned to do, even if you know judging a draft immediately _ as opposed to four or years down the road _ is one of the most ridiculous exercises in your profession."

I'm tired of the media flogging themselves over the ridiculousness of immediately rating the draft, but then doing it anyway. If they were so bothered by it, they'd stop doing it. It's disingenuous. It's "cover your ass" in disguise.

ButteryPat said he thinks that DHB is an excellent pick and that he expects DHB to be a true #1 receiver.

I think DHB was a questionable pick and will be (pleasantly) surprised if he becomes a true reliable #1 receiver.

We both stuck our necks out, and we'll have to live with our takes, however it all pans out. For me, that's fun.

I know, these analysts are garbage....one of them didn't even know where Oakland was. It's just insane how they think they know what is good for the Raiders when they don't even know we run a 4-3 and that Oakland is in the USA. The nerve, they think they know as much as AL DAVis has farted, PFFFFT. I can't wait for the season to begin, we are going to the show, can you believe it, I'm ssooooo hyped.

I'm with you on that one. I was one of the biggest Lamont Jordan supporters you could find the day we signed him. I was also pushing for Al to bring back Shell. I think I blew that one.

I wanted Oher, and I still think he would fit the ZBS and be a better pass protector at LT. I believe he will be in the Pro Bowl within 4 years.

Darrius, though, is intriguing. Maybe he was a reach at 7. Cliff Branch came in with with similar abilities. Difference was he was a 4th rounder (98). At that position Branch is considered a steal. He has similar career stats and only one less ring than Lynn Swann.

Just checked out the post Calico was referring to, and now I'm pissed off and loaded for bear. So this is all in reference to that. Here we go:

Alright, Calico, you're officially a dickhead if you think this:

"How many receivers were taken before Jerry Rice? I bet he would've been quite the "reach" at number 7, too. When people like you try to instantly assess the value of a drafted player, that's not objectivity at all. It's bullshit."

Means that what I was doing was comparing Jerry Rice's football skills to Darrius Heyward-Bey's. I was trying to tell you what you've constantly claimed to understand, and yet made every attempt to deny: that sometimes a team knows more about a player than fucking Mel Kiper. How dare you accuse me of backtracking and dishonesty, especially when you just got done turning this:

"Go over the draft history for the past 40 years and please show me 1 single WR taken in the 1st round, let alone the Top 10, who had less than 50 receptions. << crickets >>"

Into this:

"Still waiting. The larger point I was trying to convey that went right over your head is the fact that is highly unusual for the 1st WR taken in the draft to have such meager stats regardless of the system, team, or circumstances."

You shameless dick. Also, how dare you possibly accuse me of not knowing the career of the greatest player in the NFL.

I didn't think I'd be able to stop being pissed, but hey, you gave me a laugh at least:

"No. The CJ plan is to take the best available on the board who is most likely to have an immediate impact from day 1 or trade down if possible/necessary."

Uh-huh. Whose board is that? The board your scouts painstakingly assemble for you? Your board? OR, the Mel Kiper big board...I'd wager money as to which it was. You know that the NFL doesn't actually work like Madden, and that the "best available" player could be anybody your heart desires, right?

I also liked your use of one of my other favorite logical fallacies, the false dichotomy:

Because I said that talent should be the most important consideration, what I'm really saying is that no other player in the draft had talent. Yeah, because I couldn't possibly be saying that he just had more talent, right? And anyway, the time to talk Raji, Monroe or Oher has passed. You believe this pick was a reach because Crabtree, Maclin, and...I don't know, Nicks or Harvin (can't remember what Mel Kiper said) is better than Heyward-Bey. So argue that. I'm particularly curious as to why Maclin is the better choice. I'm guessing it'll have something to do with him putting up better numbers in college than Heyward-Bey, despite lower marks in every conceivable physical category and a scheme that couldn't translate to the NFL if it had the goddamn Rosetta stone.

The false dichotomy also makes an appearance here:

"Can't have it both ways Pat. BTW, I read countless sources as an interested Raiders fan. If you can show me 1 analyst who had DHB going higher than mid round, please show me. If you can name 1 team who wanted to trade up to get DHB, show me. If you can name 1 team who considered taking DHB in the mid round or earlier, show me.The "buzz" about DHB was that the Raiders would fall in love with his stop watch speed and attempt to recreate the "vertical offense". Guys like Lombardi, Maycock, Farmer, all astutely pointed this out. There was no other team linked to DHB. If you can show me any source that had another team linked to him, please point it out."

Yeah, I think I can. Find where I argued that the scouts are never right, and I'll admit to trying to have it "both ways". If you'd care to know what my actual opinion is instead of assuming you know it already (another running theme for you) I think these analysts play a very small piece in the larger puzzle, but since they're reporters and not football people, they get sucked up in hype and numbers, and it often leads them to believe things like Dave Klingler is a number one pick because he racked up 700 yards in a game, despite his system and opposition being nothing like the NFL.

Here's a link, by the way: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/giants/2009/04/23/2009-04-23_giants_targeting_maryland_receiver.html

Read that article, print it out and shove it up your ass. That should be the last time you make me out to be an uninformed jackass when you haven't done the most cursory research. That literally took me two seconds to find. Oh, look, it's the exact team I told you it was.

I won't directly quote you anymore, because this thing has become long enough as it is, but the gist is you getting the vapors because I brought up Heyward-Bey's record-setting 40, saying he is definitely not the most impressive physically while providing no evidence, and then saying that it doesn't really matter if he is because Vernon Gholston and Mike Mamula were too. That's a frigging non-sequitor. How is "most impressive physical specimen" a translation for "had a really good workout"? And couldn't you at least have found a wide receiver that proves your point? Besides which, what are you implicating? That a good workout means you're automatically a "workout warrior"? Yeah, sometimes guys work out real good and they don't wind up being that great, but there's no way you can possibly spin a good workout into a bad thing.

And anyway, you're still assuming my entire opinion is based on the combine and the .40 time. I've been eating, breathing and living Darrius Heyward-Bey for a couple days now. Based on what I've seen, read, and heard (and eaten), I think he's the right guy, the best pick in the draft. The .40 time matters, absolutely it does. No team doesn't pay attention to the .40 times, and absolutely no team doesn't value a player's speed, especially a receiver. But even more so, he's got a star's physique. That's what "most impressive physical specimen" means. Excellent height, build, and strength, and the fact that he's as fast as he is is the thing that takes him over the top.

And on that, I can't believe you honestly said "so what" to Heyward-Bey being taller than Johnnie Lee Higgins. You really don't know what the value of a receiver's height is? I actually thought for a second you might know more than me, you sure seemed confident enough, but that proves that you don't have a fucking clue. Ask anybody why Larry Fitzgerald is as successful as he is, and if they know anything they'll tell you it's primarily because of his height and build. They actually talked a lot about that during the Super Bowl, but I'll assume you were probably too busy poring over NFL Draft Review to actually watch the game of football.

The crux of our disagreement stems from this concept of "value" in draft picks: that it's not just important to draft a good player, but that you also make sure that Mel Kiper and Todd McShay have him ranked highly. You may not think this to be your view, but please inform me of where you got the idea that Heyward-Bey was the 4th best receiver in the draft. It may surprise you (it won't) to learn that Mel Kiper and Todd McShay had him ranked in the same place. So you're essentially arguing that having a good draft means buying into media-driven hype created by people who have never been involved in the NFL.

I'm tired of the arrogance, Calico. Your magazine subscription and ability to watch SportsCenter don't impress me. You're just a fan, dude, you're not any different from me. And If you want ME to take YOU seriously, you ought to explain why, if your scouts and your personal experience and knowledge tell you one guy is the best, but Mel Kiper says it's somebody else, that you should ignore your staff and take whomever Mel Kiper ranks the highest. And again, you may think you're using anybody else's opinion to make your judgement of "value", but the proof is in the pudding and yours looks exactly the same.

By the way, I accidentally posted that on the old thread, because I was jumping between them in order to reference both of Calico's posts. I admit, it's a little harsh, particularly "shameless dick", but I felt like I was being called a liar. I don't like being called a liar.

Some of you guys, I think, are misunderstanding what the vertical offense is all about. You don't stretch the field 25 times a game, you do it five or six. Maybe you connect on two, maybe you get a pass interference on one. If they do that, they've done what they set out to do, and they've changed the defense. We have Miller, and possibly Walker, to be the intermediate and short receivers. Plus, there's McFadden and Bush to be in a potential Charlie Garner role.

H- yeah, guilty. My poppa went there, and I've been a fan ever since the year we got mauled by Tommy Frazier (I'm a youngin', only 20), a name I will never ever forget. Grew up idolizing Danny Weurffel. I think I gravitated to the Gators because they reminded me of the Raiders. Not just that the names rhyme, but that they have a "take what we can" attitude, and habitually lead the nation in penalties. :)

And finally, WTF is this statement all about?"Jamarcus Russell's development was stunted for quite a while because he thought he knew better than his coaches,"

"How did you come up with this? His developement was stunted by his agent and Kiffen.

-moshbucket"

I already explained this, but Kiffin mentioned (I think in his first year) that Jamarcus didn't work hard enough on things like his footwork, mechanics, and reads because knew he was ready, that he was a playmaker, and that his game had gotten him success thus far. He talked about convincing Russell to change his instincts and I believe used the phrase "tearing him down and building him back up". After Calico's "name me one other team interested" gaffe, can we at least trust that I don't make shit up?

Hey everyone. Just listened to a short interview on the draft with Ron Jaworski on the "Mike and Mike" show and Jaworski actually had a lot of really nice things to say about DHB. The jist of his comments were that he didn't think the pick was as much of a "head scratcher" as everyone else seems to and in researching for the draft he was very impressed with what he saw on film from DHB. Just thought I'd pass along a rare opportunity for some positive Raider press. Give it a listen if your like me and really needed some sort of Raider related pick me up.

I'm reading all of the comments about DHB, good and bad, but haven't offered my take, other than I was expecting an o-lineman, and we took ZERO the whole draft.The upside for DHB seems to be his speed, character, yada-yada-yada. His downside is inconsistency at catching(which most blame the school and system he was in).

My take on DHB and the pick; I think we get a better WR in Jarrett Dillard who was picked by the Jags in Round 5. We needed O-Line, specifically a captain of the O-Line, and that pick should've been Alex Mack. My first thought when I saw our pick was, "What the hell? You're kidding right? This is worse than taking Jano in the first round!"

DHB reminds me of someone all too familiar in Raider Nation. Speed, spread the field, flashy JAMES JETT! Have you crapped yourself yet? I have.

But while I complain, we still have some good chances of signing some "Free Agent" guys that may bring upside to the debacle known as the draft. Here's my list of Free Agents we pursue before camp:

Blanda Rocked...incorrect analysis from where I'm standing. I've watched HB. He in fact does drop balls and he does in fact have small hands for his size. Moreover, he's never been known for running disciplined routes. You're talking about a relatively decent college receiver with track speed. That doesn't translate to the NFL. Al, once again went for speed over logic. Same ol' shit, and it's been going on for the better part of two decades.I'll say it again, so my position is clearly on the record: this is a no-brainer. Crabtree was the most gifted overall athlete in the draft, period. He will be a top-flight receiver in this league. HB won't. There's no doubt in my mind.

FWIW, Rice was highly touted coming out of college. The only question about his game was his speed. Pretty dumb thinking in retrospect, don't ya think? It's all about hands and the the ability to make cuts. All the other nonsense about stretching the field is just noise.

Can't we all just get along?How about I call you a dick, and you call me a cunt, and we leave it at that? I don't read half the posts some times because of the bickering. BP, I didn't see what triggered you'rs , but man, that's some text.

Jones, any pick can be argued one way or another. Nobody's saying DHB was the RIGHT pick (nobody knows what the right pick is until the career is in full swing). But you consistly label things as definately WRONG. Not trying to break your balls about it, just saying that's the way the takes are tumbling.

PS: Kiff is a bitch. He should have been teaching Russel those things instead of bitching about them to the press. Everyone comming out of college has things they need to work on, and often things they are not aware of. I wouldn't really call that "not doing what the coach tells you", but that's JMO.Welcome to the SEC punk. And your old man doesn't have a dungy built D to ride on this time either (no disrespect to Monte).

AvantGrape, the real lesson in Rice was that teams put too much weight in his .40 time because they didn't get a chance to watch him play, not that he wasn't fast. His productivity had a lot to do with his speed and perfect running style. There wasn't any film on him, but once teams saw him in action it became obvious how fast he really was. It took Bill Walsh taking a personal trip to a game to convince him he was the right guy.

If you ask me, it's really dumb that teams assumed they had the whole picture on Rice when the information available was sparse and incomplete, but that's the same "common sense" that is leading the entire sports media to write off our second pick.

Mosh, yeah I'm in agreement. Kiff is most certainly a bitch. And I couldn't be happier to see him in the SEC, where my Gators will almost certainly make him pay for calling them cheaters. I can't to see the look on Kiffin's face when he realizes that there is nothing more dangerous than a Tebow scorned. But, that's what he said, and I don't think it was dishonest. Poor coaching was always a big factor, but I don't think Jamarcus had the right attitude to be a big-time player right now. That seems like it's changing as time has gone on. And know that even when I appear to be getting worked up and refer to myself as "pissed off" or call somebody a dick, I'm really not that mad about it. I just have a little bit of a sailor's mouth, and my delivery doesn't often translate well to the written word. By the way, I was respectfully disagreeable with Take and Roy, because they treated me with respect. Calico made it clear from the beginning that I was going to get neither respect nor goodwill.

And sorry for the text. That post was so long because Calico and I had backed and forthed and dissected each other's points until it kinda came to a head with my final post. I thought it was funny how it all seemed to get longer and longer as time went on.

Rice played Mississippi Valley State, hence a lot of folks assume that there was no hype about the guy. But to the contrary. Rice was a phenomeon in his senior season. It was not at all unusual to see highlights of him on ESPN. If I'm not mistaken, some those games were shown live as well. The film existed. I remember that much. Many scouts at the time had him as the #1 receiver coming out of the draft. I know that as a Raider fan I was pretty bummed when the Niners were able to land him. Just as I am about Crabtree. I'll never understand how if you're going to take a WR with your pick, why not pick the most surehanded, athletic one. Crabtree is a playmaker, period. The kid knows how to get the endzone. It may take him a season to adjust, but he's going to be an elite receiver. I don't see that in HB at all. Sorry. I just can't enthused about this one.

Hey thanks a lot for responding to my responses, I am not negative no more.

I keep trying to tell you, the 7th pick overall was a great pick, he is almost 6'2" and can run like Bob Hayes. I don't think it is a reach at all and why bother trying to get extra players and or picks with the "value" Of the pick? Why does everyone keep saying "value", what does that mean anyways? We got the guy that fits our plan, that is all the matters. We got a guy who played teirII in the SECOND round, what a steal!!

We got some potentially awesome ST players in the later rounds, I really think these players will bring us over the top. Al knows what he is doing, anyone who questions Al Davis needs to have their heads examined.

Guilty as charged. See my post right before yours. I was all over the Shell thing.

One addendum to my previous post. Yes, stick your neck out. But, to what Jerry MacDonald was saying, I believe he was alluding to comments like “immediate bust” that was being applied to Heyward-Bey. The guy is sitting on his couch with his family, not even invited to the draft and this idiot is telling the world he’s useless. That’s idiocy. We won’t know until they snap their chin straps next September. Just think of all the players the “experts” were salivating over that went nowhere. Does the name Ryan Leaf ring a bell? Lord Brett was actually thought to become only an average QB when the Parakeets traded him to the Cheezers.

To be honest I actually don’t think Darrius will be a number one receiver in terms of catches. Branch never was. His job is Yards Per Catch. Look at Branch averaging 24 per catch on only 42 catches. Schilens may actually catch more passes. So might Miller.

Stabler explained on the deep passes to Branch he just took the five or seven step drop, set and threw. He couldn’t hold the ball. If he did Branch would out run it. He trusted Branch to be there. With Russell we won’t have that problem. Possibly just the opposite.

A quote from an article on the Midgets, “According to two sources familiar with the team's plans, the Giants are looking to trade up in the first round with the hopes of getting into position to draft Heyward-Bey. The 6-2, 210-pounder is one of the fastest receivers in the draft - he once ran a 4.23 in the 40-yard dash - and the Giants view him as the big-play, deep threat they so desperately need now that Plaxico Burress has been released.”

It appears a recent Super Bowl winner was taking a hard look at the guy. What would have been the analyst opinion had the midgets say, moved to 16 and took him. Probably would have declared them geniuses.

As for Russell’s foot work, I complained about that early last season. But, after Cable took over it began to improve about mid season, and was actually pretty decent in the last three games. Kiffin was trying to get fired. That being the case, he probably didn’t care about Russell or his footwork and refused to call real passing plays. I find it amazing how one can improve if the coach actually wants you to. It wasn’t that Russell thought he knew more than the coaches, it’s just that his HC didn’t give a damn.

Mossbucket, I didn't realize D. J. was on the practice squad. Thanks for the info.

Well yeah, there was a bit of hype about Rice and also about his team. They put up such impressive figures that it was impossible to deny them. They did attract the national media spotlight, I don't know if it wound up with them being on TV or not, but could be.

Did I say something about film not existing? I don't remember now if I did. If I did, obviously you've proved me wrong here, but if I'm understanding, your assertion that the film existed was based on my assertion that they didn't see him play, right? By that I was referring to the lack of interest that was shown to him, and that I think it led scouts to not do their homework on him. I don't know what all the scouts had him ranked at, all I know is that the only teams interested in him were Dallas and San Francisco. Obviously he had a bit of hype, he managed to go number 1 in the USFL draft, so there was definitely some interest in him. Plus, he had eye-popping numbers, so he was going to get some looks. But the more-or-less general consensus among teams that he wasn't the right pick shows me they didn't value him very highly.

I understand your point about "the most surehanded", but I'll argue with you about which receiver is the superior athlete. Crabtree being shorter than advertised is a problem, and he doesn't have the dangerous size and speed combo that Heyward-Bey has. Both receivers have some big question marks, but for me at least, Heyward-Bey's questions are more easily answered, and some of Crabtree's questions are downright unpleasant.

With Heyward-Bey, it's questions like "why wasn't he more productive in college?" and "what about his hands?" You can answer his production by talking about his system, and his team. His hands can be answered by mentioning that he makes the tough, playmaking catches that nobody else can when it counts. I've heard he has a tendency to drop the easy ones, and I'll accept that for now, but you'll agree with me that it's easier to coach him to catch the easy ones than to be a playmaker, and that learning how to make the small, mundane plays is the job for every draft pick.

Those unpleasant Crabtree questions are more things like "is he going to be a huge problem in the locker room" and "what will he do when he doesn't get to play against the Big 12 in a spread offense that doesn't come close to resembling the NFL, and inflates a receiver's receiving numbers with short screens". Those are much more difficult to explain away, and it's why I never advocated Crabtree or thought he'd be the pick, even though I didn't like Heyward-Bey for a long time either.

And JONES continues wildly flapping his arms, hoping somebody will give him the attention his dad never did.

"Why won't you play catch with me, daddy?"

"And the cat's in the cradle and the silver spoon,Little boy blue and the man on the moon,When you comin' home, Dad?I don't know when, but we'll get together then, sonYou know we'll have a good time then..."

Oh come on Buttercup, that was very low. What are talking about, I am on your side now. Does it bother you that I express my opinion on here? Why are you being such a bully? Why can't I be a member on here? Moshbucket mentioned me on here so he likes me.

Why is it so hard for you to get over my bad attitude from earlier? I have seen the light, thanks to you and all the positive energy.

Had it been something Kiffin said in the later days, I wouldn't have put any stock in it. But since (I think) he said it early on, I gave it a bit more weight. He was actually generally quite complimentary about Jamarcus, he said he was undeniably a playmaker and a weapon, but that he had to learn to develop his instincts, and that the coaches would work with him and have him do everything perfectly, only to have him abandon a lot of the technical stuff in the game scenarios and rely on his big-time abilities. Now that I think about it, I agree that it probably wasn't a case of him "thinking he knew more", it was just his instincts and self-confidence, which aren't necessarily bad things, but can definitely impede development.

Crabtree caught 97 passes for 1,165 yards and 19 touchdowns last season (probably not a fluke). Drafted 10th by 49ers.

Maclin had 102 catches for 1,260 yards and 13 touchdowns last season (again, probably not a fluke - plus, an excellent return man). Drafted 19th by Eagles.

Heyward-Bey had career-lows last season with 42 catches for 609 yards and 5 TDs, and totaled only 13 TDs in his college career (again, probably not a fluke).

No worries, right? The Raiders have a solid history of getting the most out of WRs.... like Randy Moss, Javon Walker, Jerry Porter, et al.

No need to draft linemen, right? The Raiders are experts at judging OL and DL talent. You know, Harris, Kelly, Sands, et al.

Khalif Barnes comes with quite a resume. To paraphrase J-Mac, “Barnes signed a one-year contract with the Raiders off a penalty-prone season in which he gave up 9.5 sacks in Jacksonville.” Sound familiar?

The bottom line is that it was absolutely critical for the Raiders to squeeze every ounce of value from this draft. Instead, they intentionally avoided OL and drafted marginal talent at the top of the draft, including a player coming off significant injury in Rd 3.

I think it was my post that got your dander up originally so I wanted to clarify something. The analysis I posted was a cut/paste from Yahoo. Looking back I should have refereneced it as such, as I never meant for them to be construed as my words. My comments, not that they were all that noteworthy, were posted after the analysis.

I believe Crabtree is the better WR than HB. I think he's more talented and has more "football" skill. And by that I mean his ability to seperate, his explosive speed and his ability to get into the endzone. I agree 100% that the spread offense does not equate to the NFL, but talent does. And Crabtree is more talented. Put another way, the spread may not be a good indicator, but Crabtree certainly made the most of his opportunities, something I do not think you can say about HB.

In 3 years HB was shut out in 4 games, he caught 11 passes once, and outside of that game never caught more than 6 and never touched 1,000 recieving yards. And by most reports his hands are suspect.

Does this mean I think he'll be a bust? No. But is he going to be a game changing wideout? Nope. And the Raiders desperately need game changers. Crabtree will be a game changer.

As for his physical gifts, there's not a whole lot I can add that hasn't been said. And who knows maybe he was/is the most athletically gifted football player in the whole draft. So what? Pure athleticism does not equal greatness on the football field. I cannot but be reminded of another supreme athlete with questionable hands, one Mr. Rickey Dudley. He looked absolutely awesome in his uniform, couldn't catch a cold if he played in snow in his undies, however.

Maybe he's a bit before your time, but I suffered through everyone of his drops, easy or hard. Catching a football isn't something you can teach. You can teach a player the playbook, how to run a route, but the instinct to be able to catch the ball? I don't think you can.

How about that for a take?

:)

Perhaps it's a spurious comparision (and I'm sure some will point out the error of my ways) espeically since Dudley was a TE and Heward-Bey is a WR. But for me the comparision holds true. Great athlete, not a great football player. Again the Raiders desperately need great football players. Especially in the first rounds of the draft.

It's been pointed out ad nauseam, so I'll just say it again. The draft is a crap shoot. However the smart thing to do would be to mitigate that risk by drafting a player with the least amount of question marks.

And finally, it's not surprising that Davis and Cable were on the same page regards to HB. I'm sure their source material is the same, I would find it hard to believe with everything on his plate Cable is sending out his own personal scouts to evaluate players. I'm positive he's basing his opinions on the information he's given. And I would contend that the Raiders have a bias for certain types of players, with a certain skill set. If he looks good on the scouting report why wouldn't you pick him 7th overall? It's not a lie or a conspiracy, I just think it's a problem within our scouting department.

If HB turns into Fitz or TO or even Moss or Cliff Branch, then you can say told you so, told you so, told. you. so. But unfortunately past history says he won't. He'll probably be a servicable player who, again, will look awesome running down the field, but won't really mean shit when is comes to winning games consistently.

If you can't see the difference between the 1st WR taken at #7 and the 4th WR taken at #22, I can't help you out.

I also find it rather amusing when you conveniently leave out other points that I made such as "Like anything, there are always going to be exceptions". Don't take my words out of context. The challenge I had was to find a WR taken so high in the 1st round with less than 50 WRs. You name Harvin who had 110 touches last year in spite of missing 2 games. Is Harvin as a "WR" who runs the ball 70 times not an exception? If my challenge was so easy to refute, how come you haven't named another WR in say the past 10, 20, 30 years. I'll tell you why. It is extremely rare which was my whole point to begin with.

I have no idea what you are referencing about "sorrying" ... The last thing I need to do is apologize to you for my opinions. As RT pointed out with his original post, this is a place to share each individual's opinions ... nothing more, nothing less.

Great post Toni. I'm with you 100% about drafting football players not athletes.

At the end of the day, it is all about identifying football skills that have the best chance to translate into the NFL game.

People can talk all they want about 40 yard dash times, heights, weights, systems, small college vs. major colleges.

Finding players that have a proven performance track record and love football are IMO the biggest indicators of future success. For what it is worth, here are the stats of Rice, Crabtree, and DHB in their respective last college season:

Once a few days have passed and I've vented my disappoitment, I will quickly bounce back to supporting the players we've selected. I'm looking forward to seeing these guys in camp especially Mike Mitchell. We all know the draft is a crapshoot and there are different ways of viewing the evaluation process and building a team.

When we were on the clock, I was begging the TV "Please take Monroe, please take Monroe!" Instead we took DHB who seems like a guy who you can rally behind.

With all of the heated debating, I think a few posters have gone a little too far with the childish name calling. The day I start worrying about whether or not another poster agrees with my opinion, I will check out. The sole reason I visit this site daily is for the give and take of differing opinions.

Toni: yeah, it was you, mostly. I was also a little miffed at some of the other posts, too, but my initial angry post, and I do regret being as harsh and reactionary as I was, was predominately directed at you. I'm glad to hear more from you, and I like your ideas. How's that for a take? Damn good, I say. You did a good job.

Calico: the "sorrying" I referred to is your irritating use of the word "sorry" before you insult my intelligence and disrespect me, such as "Sorry Pat, but you've lost all credibility" and "sorry Pat, but you have to dig deeper if you want to be taken seriously". Like I said, don't apologize to me. If you're going to insult me, insult me. Do it the real way, like JONES does.

So the arbitrary twelve games qualification is out? If so, I can find a shitload of wide receivers taken in the first round who had less than 50 "WRs" in a year. How about Matt Jones, who had zero, as he played quarterback? Surely you'd agree that drafting somebody to play wide receiver in the first who never played it is riskier than somebody who didn't have the production, correct? How about Troy Williamson, Santonio Holmes, Reggie Wayne, Kevin Dyson who didn't play a down his senior year, Bryant Johnson, and Travis Taylor. Yeah, I couldn't find anybody else, woe is me. Only 7 players in the last ten drafts, yeah, it never happens. What do you think would possibly happen if I kept going further back, when people used to get less receptions?

The only reason I stuck with Harvin, or even picked him initially is because he met every goal you set, and I thought it would be funny to watch you backtrack and pretend like you didn't say what you did. Which is exactly what you did, only it wasn't as funny as I thought it would be. Now I'm interested in seeing how you will manage to explain away every one of these guys, and what the new rules of the game will be.

And I'm "still waiting" for an explanation as to how the Raiders were to trade back, who with, and how they could guarantee Heyward-Bey would still be on the board with the Giants looking to trade up. Because otherwise, you harping on the "value" of the pick is idle bitching.

Calico, I've had it. You offered me no respect from the beginning of this. You've lost the ability to take the high ground and act shocked-Shocked! That I might call you a dick for insinuating I'm some lying jackass who doesn't know the career of Jerry Rice. Like I said, I've been respectfully disagreeable with Take, Roy, AvantGrape, and now I'll probably be with Toni too. Hell, I even disagreed with H today, but that didn't become a problem. Because they treated me with respect and haven't yet insulted my intelligence.

You immediately called my "credibility" into question and informed me that I "obviously know next to nothing about the value of draft picks" for not agreeing with you. From that point on, I made the decision that I wasn't going to hold back or play nice with you. I can't believe that you would act the way you have towards me and still feel the right to act above the fray.

As a rule the vertical pass may have only been hit 3-5 times per game average BUT....The "WR" continued to run that type of rout throughout the game...

At times they could break the rout of and "Button Hook" or do a "Come-Back" or a "Cross" while the "DB" got lost in space trying to make-up position on the play...But the "WR" than on subsequent plays goes back to his deep rout...

Thus the "S"s are constantly occupied and NOT up on the line to "Run Assist" which opens things up for the "RB"s -n- "WR" on underneath routs...Intermediate-n-Short...

In today's "D"s they will move to a "Nickle-n-Dime" coverage to try to stop all that shit...I hope they try it because that means there are only 5-6 in the box and our "RB" will have a field day...

The "TE" is constantly a target in that "O"...Than the team goes to a "2-TE-O" and brings in their big backs who by the way can also "Catch-n-Run" out of the back-field....This is very good on a short field in the red-zone or on 3rd-n-short...4th-n-short....But we always have at least one quick strike weapon in the game that the "S"s and "CB" have to check-down on 1st before they pursue run-support...

This season we can expect to have a few wrinkles in that "O" as Cable likes as well as the players and now we have all the weapons necessary to run it....Not only one player in our back-field has speed...They all do...And size so stop the comparisons to "Jet" who was as I remember small but fast...

>>>>The challenge I had was to find a WR taken so high in the 1st round with less than 50 WRs.>>>>

What a moronic challenge. What difference does it make where a person is drafted until we find out what kind of career he has?

Or are you still fixating on this mythical "value" thing that has no actual meaning until four years from now?

I think I know where most of this comes from.. and I think I have mentioned it before.

Anytime any of the so called "experts" say anything that appears embarrassing about the Raiders you all go BOO HOO HOO... ESPN MADE FUN OF US... BOO HOO HOO... I WANTED THE PLAYER THE PEOPLE ON TEEVEE LIKED... BOO HOO HOO... WE SHOULD HAVE TRADED DOWN!!! I AM SOOO EMBARRASSED BECAUSE THEY THINK WE ARE DUMB BOO HOO HOOO

Not taking away anything from Crabtree & Maclin, but there were many more opportunities for them to pile up stats, as they were part of highly skilled passing attacks. I don't imagine that they would have put up the same numbers in Maryland. To take it even further, look at our offense last year. First half of the season Jamarcus wasn't allowed to throw. As Cable loosened the reins the number of receptions went up - Miller had 34 of his 56 catches over the 2nd half, and Higgins had 14 of his 22 receptions in the last 4 games. Opportunities are the key. And if you go back a couple of years, you'll find that Maryland was oddly consistent - 223 completions in 2007 and 204 in 2006. The chances for big stats just weren't there.

I'd have rather taken a lineman to be honest. However, I can see why they'd be reluctant to do anything there at this point. The sad reality is that the money given to Kelly & Sands makes it difficult to put any more into this position. And considering Cable's talent as a line coach I would have to defer to him in regards to the OL.

If the scouts concluded DHB was best suited for the WR position, then I'm willing to accept it. Remember, we're not talking about a slam dunk in Crabtree. There are complaints about taking a guy coming off of an injury in the latter rounds - why would you do that with a first rounder? Stress fractures are tough, and foot injuries have a tendency to repeat themselves. It wouldn't surprise me that the medical condition, along with the diva attitude reports, were enough to take him off the board. At that point it's Maclin - a Higgins clone - or DHB. Not too big of a stretch when viewed in that light.

BTW - Calvin Johnson's rookie stats were 48-756-4. Would we take that from DHB?

Only 1 of these players can be considered a true #1 WRs on their respective clubs and the majority are flat out busts or marginal players at best.

When you take a player at #7 you certainly are expecting this player will pan out to be your #1 WR. Do you want to argue this point? Go for it. Spin it, justify it, slice and dice it.

As usual you lose all perspective when you mention guys that were taken as the 3rd, 4th, 5th, or later WRs in the 1st round. For some reason you have a hard time objectively discerning the differene between the first WR taken and the 5th taken. You also lose all sense of reason for what a top 10 pick should equate to. The last time I check, a top 10 pick means a productive, proven player, a solid prospect with virtually no flaws or concerns. Are there flaws or concerns with DHB? Absolutely. Anyone who thinks there are not concerns with DHB is only kidding themselves.

Don't worry Pat. I won't use the word 'sorry' anymore because obviously you've got a very thin skin. You can dish it but have a hard time taking it. No worries. You get so bent out of shape when someone challenges your opinion or position on a topic that you lose all sense of objectivity. Cool. I'm not sweating your internet tough guy act.

Look I'm not the only Raider fan or poster on this board that has legitimate concerns about whether DHB was the right pick but don't take our conerns or disappointment or frustrations out of context. These are honest, heartfelt conerns but as I said earlier, most of us will get over it because there isn't anything we can do about it but support the team we love. And yes, this includes supporting DHB 100%.

Michael Crabtree got tested by a real defense once last year, in the Cotton Bowl against Ole Miss in which he caught 4 passes for 30 yards, averaging 7.5 yards a catch. When his team needed him the most, with the big game on the line, Crabtree failed miserably and his team lost. Of course, Crabtree blamed it on some kind of bizarre "eye injury", and that his ankle hurt, so there's that. Yeah, that's a big-time playmaker.

He also averaged 7.0 yards against Baylor and 7.8 yards against Kansas. And this is the great opportunist who makes the most of every catch? Because what it looks like to me is somebody who was propped up against the biggest joke conference in college football, and couldn't hang when the big boys came to play. If you ask me, Crabtree's the one with bust written all over him.

Calico: You know, I was sort of joking to myself that you might go this way, but I actually gave you enough credit to believe you wouldn't be so dishonest, especially since I already got on your case for qualifying your point into oblivion. We're not talking about the merits of any of these guys, it has nothing to do with your argument. The last time you reinvented your point you made it quite clear that what you meant was that it as an incredibly rare occurence that a receiver with Heyward-Bey's numbers would be taken in the first round. You never said anything about them being the first receiver picked, and you never said anything about them panning out in the NFL. I showed you seven in the last ten who were, several of which went in the top ten, and now you've reinvented it again and brought back "objectivity", which makes so little sense in this context that I think you might not actually know what the word means. Stop trying. You lost that part of the argument. Deal with it.

And a big hearty laugh at you for calling me thin-skinned when you posted some whiny high-horse shit about "childish insults" and "SOME of the posters here". I told you to insult me like a man. That's the annoying part, Calico. Not that you challenged me, but that you didn't have any balls while you did it. JONES calls me a dope. I like that. He's at least saying what he means. You hide behind coded language and then cry about it when I recognize it for what it is and approach you directly.

And I'd really like to see an example of my "internet tough-guy act". You're just full of buzzwords, aren't ya? Did I say I was "gonna kick yer ass" or something? If you sensed tough-guyness from me, it must be that my toughness transcends me. I think I'll take it as a compliment, even.

Oh yeah, and here we go with trying to make this into being about me not liking that you don't like Darrius Heyward-Bey. I don't give a shit if you do or you don't. I don't like YOU. It's your pomposity, arrogance, delusions of grandeur and shameless dishonesty. Not that you have concerns about Darrius Heyward-Bey.

I was a "Doomer" for a few hours Saturday after the 1st rd ended but after sleeping on it and realizing there is a "Plan" and they stuck to it I came around to a better understanding and now only want to concentrate on fully understanding that "Plan"...

The hell with all that "Doom-n-Bust" crap...Let's get on with some football and see what happens on the field before we pass judgement...

In view of this I just want to ask one simple question to wake up a few posters here...

What is your personal reaction when you see something that others fail to see and you take action accordingly only to meet with constant negative bull shit before anyone has a chance to see how it works out????....

Maybe you should consider this prior to opening your big mouth or in this case your finger-tips...And don't try to lie as to the answer as I have seen enough reaction here already to some small "Neg" that has been posted in response to your opinions....

On to a Positive posting...

"V-O"....

Our past teams did not have what we have now..."Jet" was fast but did not have the size-n-physical attributes of "DHB"..."Jet" dropped so many big plays on the turf that "DB"s stopped following him and he failed to even be a good decoy....Than I think he made 2-3 surprise catches but still most of the attempts went to the turf....Other "WR"s like Brown spoke down about his lack of attention on the game...

"DHB" does NOT appear to have that type of problem...Just the opposite...He has been told he won't make it but is so committed to development that he goes full speed ahead....I love that in a man and in a football player...

Branch was our Speed-n-Deep "WR" but not our #1...That was Biletnikoff who worked the side-lines and underneath but would occasionally turn up-field and go down-town...Branch as our #2 did not have all the tools of "DHB"....That combination of size-n-speed is very rear and coupled with the rest of his physical attributes make him an impressive prospect which is all that is being drafted at any position in the draft....A "Draft Prospect" and NOT an established NFL player...Ya get one of them as a "FA" or in a trade...

What Branch did have is a "QB" who could consistantly get him the ball...He had a game-plan that took advantage of his strengths...He had a #1 "WR" who drew away constant attention from the "DB"s and left him open...He had a "TE" who did the same...He also had a Power "RB" who forced the "D" to play up and not constantly play deep...And he of course had a great "OL" with future "HOF"s...

So now let's break it down and see what "DHB" will have in support with this new team...

"WR"s...

Walker is un-known as a result of injuries and worthless ass attitude...Can it improve...We can only hope so...

Higgins was the #1 last season and is an improving talent that may be depended upon this year and he also has very good speed...

Shillings is tall and evidently talented receiver who is developing well of late and may have a chance to become a top target...

Chris Carter will return from injury but is totally un-known to us as he became injured in the pre-season....There are others on the roster who may develop with time...

Need....Try to go after Boldin if available...Plaxico would also be a good fit....But now some will say we already have too much money tied-up in the "WR" so we need to move walker somehow...NO Biletnikoff presently on the team...

"TE"...He is very good and developing nicely...He has been our most dependable target and a favorite for "JRus" so we can expect that to continue and improve.. He now has a "TE" to work opposite him and relieve him from some of his blocking duties...

Need...More time to develop and more opportunities...Could become the next Casper/Christensen type for us....

"RB"s....

Complete stable..."McFab"-n-Bush-w- Fargas-n-Rankin in the waiting...Great size-speed combinations with terrific athletic ability and good hands far and above what Branch had on his "SB" team....Perhaps the best stable of backs the Raiders have ever had...We shall see if it overtakes the Bo-Marcus combination of the past...

"FB"...Coming back off injury but very good when healthy...

Need...For the "FB" to be healthy and continue to develop...For the "HC" to fully utilize his weapons in a creative "O"....

"QB"...The biggest arm in the game today...Very talented but still developing...Needs to have the "O" designed to take advantage of his skill set...Lacked weapons but now may have enough to compete...NOT yet compared to the "MadBomber" or "Snake" or Blanda but very well could develop into that type of player...Have a very good back-up in place..Garcia...So he will be pushed this season...

Needs...time to develop and game plans that work well with his talents...

"OL"...Here we have some questions and some disagreements...The questions are legitimate as are the disagreements...

We now play in a "ZBS" instead of the "PBS" of our past...It takes advantage of our strength at running the ball but is suspect in protection for the passing game....We have players who the "HC" say will work well this season but not players who are highly rated by other teams...

Needs....Time to develop harmony on the line...Most of the line has played together now for 3 seasons in the new scheme...Creative game planning to utilize their full potential...Creative change-up in the play calling to keep the "D" off balance...The addition of veteran players who could add depth and take over in case of injury...NOT the "OL" of the Raiders "SB" era but will hopefully develop into it quickly...

So this is where we stand as I see it on the "O"...I would be interested in hearing how you see it....Break it down with more than just what the damn "Mediot"s said if you want someone to listen...

"The last time I check, a top 10 pick means a productive, proven player, a solid prospect with virtually no flaws or concerns."

The guy is a "Draft Prospect" and absolutely NOTHING is proven anywhere except on the field after the season starts...Now Please...How many of the so-called "Proven Players" have completely failed in the NFL...

I will start it off with one from our own division who was rated as a top "QB" and was drafted by "SD"...

"Crying Ryan"...

Now you can add to that list at will...And he had all those "Midget-Mediot"s beckoning at his door-step...

It’s a quote from an article, take it for what it’s worth. Might be correct, might be total crap. I didn’t claim it to be “Truth”. The URL Pat posted no longer worked, so I searched for it and posted the quote for consumption. My only comment was if the Midgets had moved up and taken him as the article insinuated, they would have been hailed as geniuses.

Toni,

I disagree. I think you can teach catching a football. Dudley was bad, but his biggest problem was between his ears. Most clear drops are from a lack of concentration. Worrying about getting hit or taking a peek downfield right before the ball gets there. With HD TV you can see it in their eyes. There was a receiver in a game I saw last season (can’t remember if it was college or pro), but he was wide open and dropped a very easy one. In the replay a close up of his face showed his eyes looking up and away as the ball arrived. The announcer offered he was trying to take a peek at himself on the Jumbo Tron. I don’t know about that, but he definitely wasn’t looking at the ball.

If a receiver wants to overcome those, it takes a lot of work and repetition. Small hands can be overcome by flexibility training and repetition on using both hands properly. Jerry Rice was an outstanding college receiver. But, he became the best of all time primarily by outworking the other guys.

Stickum,

Good post. I tried to say something similar, but yours is much clearer. A QB’s accuracy and number of passes has a lot to do with it also. Others will counter that a receivers drops have a lot to do with the QB’s accuracy.

Pat,

Don’t worry about credibility. In the end, none of us really has any. Otherwise we would be sitting on the set at BSPN going through a case of hair gel a week.

Doobie,

Careful now, you don’t want to engage a Sicilian in a battle of wits unless you have a giant in a Holocaust Cloak to help you out, and watch out for the RUS’s.

Value is not mythical, nor should we expect to wait four years to determine it.

I pointed out how Calvin Johnson racked up 12 touchdowns and 1300 yards in his second season on a winless team.

That's the type of value and production one should expect from a top ten pick at wide receiver. It has nothing to do with Crabtree or Maclin and everything to do with establishing expectations commensurate with the seventh pick in the draft at the wide receiver position.

Since everyone is so fond of bringing up Jerry Rice, I'll point out that by his second year Rice racked up 1500 yards and 15 touchdowns. In his first year, starting just four games, he racked up nearly 1,000 yards.

Quit lowering the bar and saying we need to wait four years before we know anything.

StickUm25 - I agree that stats don’t tell everything, but the notion that DHB didn’t have the opportunities that other higher ranked WRs had is not a good argument for picking him at #7.

As RT points out, the #7 pick in the draft (and the first WR taken) should be somebody that had the opportunity AND made the most of that opportunity. DHB did neither.

This guy is an unproven commodity even in the college ranks. He’s a project at best.

What bothers me more is that the Raiders claim to have made no attempt to trade down, knowing there were at least 2-3 WRs ranked ahead of DHB.... (and about, what, 20 S ranked ahead of Mitchell?)

It amazes me that some of you guys don’t understand draft value between the #7 pick and say #20 or #25. It’s not intangible, it’s worth several more picks in the draft, possibly even next year’s draft. It’s something other teams seem to understand, particularly the Pats who started with 11 picks this year.

Somebody stated this earlier, or on a previous thread (and it stuck with me).

The Raiders are either:

1) poor at evaluating talent; or 2) poor at developing talent.

Add to that, terrible at managing their draft.

One of the most memorable things about Kiffin was his claim that the Raiders needed football players (not track stars).

While I'm still not enamored of our draft, I am at least encouraged that our coaching staff mentioned all the problems I see on our team.

Cable believes FA and the center trade has shored up the O-line. He thinks he can fix the DT situation with coaching. He drafted some situational DEs and some LBs. Certainly safety is an ongoing problem, so we drafted a safety high. Hopefully that pans out.

Still, I would rather have more and better linemen on both sides of the ball.

Draft Value: To get the #40 pick, the Pats traded up about 7 slots in Rd 2 for which they gave the Raiders their 2nd, 4th and 6th Rd picks in exchange.

Imagine what a #7 pick is worth!!

The Pats parlayed that trade into drafting DT Ron Brace BC, someone the Raiders should have drafted!! A proven college player with unquestioned potential at the NFL level... at an unquestioned position of need for the Raiders.

Then, the Raiders, by all accounts, made another incredible reach with pick #47.

All of us have high expectations of a top ten receiver. And, no one is disputing value. But, value will only be determined during the season. Yep, Rice had great value, but he is the exception, not the rule.

Some of us are trying to look at the reasons this receiver was taken over the others. Many times numbers don’t tell the whole story. You have to dig deeper. Stickum pointed out that Maryland had less than half the number of completions. Hell, Texas Tech had over 60 more completions than Maryland had attempts. One could logically assume if DHB played at Texas Tech or Missouri he would have had comparable numbers.

I believe two drafts ago we were hearing we should take Brady Quinn and not Russell. Quinn had these massive number of starts, attempts, completions and was “NFL Ready”. The Brownies are trying to trade him now. Value is subjective. Yes Calvin Johnson put up great numbers in his second year. The Kittens were still 0-16.

Would his value be sufficient if he catches 70 passes with 1,100 yards and we only win 5 games again, or is it greater if he catches only 50 or less for 800 and we improve to 8 or 9 wins? Personally I don’t care who catches the most passes or scores the most TD’s. That’s for the fantasy freaks (those who play fantasy football please don’t take it personally. I just don’t play fantasy football). All I care about is, are we improving as a “Team”, and will we have a winning record with a shot at the playoffs this year. If that’s the end results, I’m happier than a pig in slop.

NYRaider,

“This guy is an unproven commodity even in the college ranks. He’s a project at best.”

Everyone coming out of the draft is an unproven commodity. As much as we may think McFadden was great value in the draft, he’s only shown flashes. He is not a proven commodity at this point. Neither is Crabtree, Macklin, or anyone taken at any point in the draft.

There is trade value when and only when another team is in need of a player and willing to pay a price to move up while he is still available...As a result a "Relative" scale has been developed to gage what price a team should expect to pay for that spot in the draft....That "Relative" price is adjusted as the amounts a desperate team is willing to pay change....

Thus...When a team pays less than the "Relative" prise the "Mediot"s say they took advantage of the other team...Conversely when the team pays too much a voice comes out and condemns them for their stupidity....

So now look threw history for a quick lesson on "Relative" value...

Mike Ditka was willing to trade his entire draft for the rights to draft "RB" Ricky Williams but teams at the top refused even that elevated price...A team took it and proceeded to rebuild their entire team with all those additional picks...So now do we suppose that every year that particular pick in the draft is worth your entire draft in trade....

Hopefully you can now get a picture of a sliding scale illustrating the "Relative" value of a particular draft position while understanding that NOT every pick in the draft above it has higher value....The value is only there when another team is willing to pay it...

You could take another lesson from "AZ" who has a "PB" "WR" coming off a "SB" loss...They attempted to trade or sell his rights for a 1st rd pick but had NO takers....Obviously NO other team viewed that "PB-WR" as that valuable..."AZ" reportedly lowered the asking price to a 2nd rd pick but still had NO takers....

So now what would you say...That a "PB-WR" is never worth a 1st or 2nd rd pick....

NOT so fast...He is worth just as much as another team is willing to pay and worth NOTHING if NO team is willing to anti-up....Next year a trade such as that may very well happen and at that time the value will be there....

The Raiders valued the addition of "NO-Moss" so much that we gave up a 1st-n-3rd to get him...He was also a "PB-WR"....A few years later "NE" took him off our hands for a much later rd pick...3rd or later I believe...Now he has proven himself again so what is his value...Only as much as another team is willing to pay...

Really...Have you ever experienced anything in marketing before...When you purchased that new car and 6 months later decided to sell it for say....60% of value...Why...Why couldn't you get at least 80-90% out of it....

Now comes time to sell that house that's hanging around your neck...But the values have fallen so fast that you may now have to pay someone to take it off your hands...Get a picture of "Relative" value...

Did the Raiders have a willing buyer for that draft position who was willing to pay what the Raiders considered to be the value of the player they wanted...

Now ya see that "Relative" value changes...It's not just worth what that sliding scale says it's worth...It's worth whatever it's owner considers it's value to be...A value high enough to make him trade it and risk NOT getting the player de desires...An offer so great that the Raiders are willing to pass up the opportunity to get that player that they desire so much...

Now we start to understand the "Relative" value of a draft pick and whether there was value there at all...

Class of "79" USU Economics 101....I was in physical science majoring in welding metallurgy in the college of engineering....

AvanteGrape, you're telling me exactly the opposite of what the scouts are saying. You're telling me that all of the scouts are wrong because you've "watched him."

According to the scouts he's the best height/speed ratio in the draft. According to the scouts, he runs more precise routs than anyone in the draft. According to the stats, he doesn't have that many drops.

I really love your last take so forgive me if I jump all over it but it's totally deserved in retrospect...

Remember When...

We were being spoken of so abusively by posters here...Our fans...The "Midget-Mediot"s....For what...

For NOT having a "GM" in place while the "Squaws" went out and got that guy from "NE" that scared the hell out of everyone here...While the "Donko"s went out and got that new "HC" from the same place...And we had what...

Remember...But now you go down on record as stating the fooling...Just a moment while I gets my scissors out....Now where the hell did I put the damn things...Oh!..There they are...

"With the Broncos and Chiefs weakened"

Now I did hear you right....Correct...They are weaker after the acquisitions at "GM"-n-"HC"...

Their NOT weaker because...Well because their draft was so bad or because they lost so many players...Right...Tell me that it's because their in disarray and so unsettled that nobody can figure out what the hell their doing...

For those determined to equate DHB with James Jett, let's review. James Jett was an UNDRAFTED FREE AGENT, who had an eye popping rookie year for an undrafted free agent. The Raiders expected, logically, that he would keep improving. He didn't.

However, his rookie performance earned him an extended contract, which the Raiders had to pay regardless of whether or not he played.

Because of that contract, and because of the fact that Jett was an UNDRAFTED FREE AGENT, there was no interesnt in trade from ANY team. Al's choices were to release him (when there were no better options for the bottom of the depth chart) and to continue paying him, or to keep him on the roster in the off chance that the HC could find a use for him.

DHB couldn't possibly have the same numbers as Crabtree and Maclin. Both Crabtree and Maclin played in pass happy offenses, and both frequently caught passess close to the line of scrimmage and broke them for big games.

DHB was used completely different, but used in the way the Raiders wish to use him - as a deep ball, over the top threat (similar to Cliff Branch).

While nobody has seen DHB display the same skills as Crabtree and Maclin - they couldn't have - because DHB's game hasn't utilized those skill sets. According to Cable, this is the reason DHB was selected. For the purpose of catching short passes and breaking them open, the Raiders have McFadden and Higgins. (Higgins, I'd remind you, has displayed his biggest weakness by having trouble positioning himself on deep routs.)

Regarding DHB's drop stats, I saw his complete statistical break down someplace, but now I'm having trouble finding it. It may have only been up on a temporary basis for his pro-day. But I'll keep looking.

PantyRaider, the Chiefs won two games last year. The Broncos won eight games last year, but they're starting over at the quarterback position. It's not like we're playing in the NFC East, right? Why shouldn't that help us?

Quit lowering the bar! Quit acting like we're still the prettiest girl at the dance!

We suck until we prove we don't. Period.

So the Broncos are in disarray. Does that make it okay for us to be in disarray?

You're already bagging on Pioli because he might not get the Chiefs into the playoffs this year while you are hoping that our GM can finally, maybe, hopefully get us to eight wins after six years of record-setting losing.

Further analysis into DHB numbers. NO QB and NO companion WR. DHB was the only player with NFL talent on Maryland's pass offense. They blanketted him on defense, and he still produced the numbers he produced, in spite of having a QB who couldn't get him the ball. I wonder what he might be able to do with a QB who can flick the ball 60 yards while sitting on his back side.

“Under no circumstances is it acceptable to win five games after setting the NFL record for consecutive seasons of five wins or less.”

I can agree with that statement, but you appeared to be assigning great value to Calvin Johnson’s second season. Whereas my value is placed improving the team and getting back to the playoffs.

It’s getting to the point where we are arguing the “how far back can we go to say something positive about the team” scenario. Someone mentions Crabtree’s gaudy numbers. Someone else says DHB had fewer opportunities due to the system. The first person comes back and says that doesn’t count. Well, why not, and when does it count?

It is arguable that Julio Jones is a better receiver than Crabtree right now (Actually I believe he is). And he played as a true freshman. He will probably never approach the numbers Crabtree or Macklin obtained last season because of the system he plays in. But, that doesn’t make Crabtree or Macklin better receivers, they just had more opportunities.

Lynn Swan and John Stallworth are in the Hall of Fame. Are they that much better receivers than Cliff Branch? No, not in my opinion. They had more opportunities. Branch was just as valuable to his team because of what he brought to the table on game day.

NYRaider,“Nice try, but that's not what I wrote. DHB is an unproven commodity even at the COLLEGE LEVEL”

I guess making All American Freshman, then All American Honorable Mention as a Sophomore, All ACC twice, and being on the Biletnikoff Award list twice is completely worthless and unproven. Wait a minute I’m sorry those things don’t count. Just the numbers. Systems don’t count, QB play doesn’t count. Just the numbers.

And, I still stand by my statement. Everyone coming out of the draft is an unproven commodity. That’s one of the reasons the owners, and some veterans, want to get to a rookie salary cap.

I'm well past the point in my life when I need to be annoyed by some punk with balls the size of marbles.

Back when you were in jr. high I was a Marine serving in Operation Desert Storm. Do you honestly think I'm worried about a snively brat boy like yourself calling me a few names? Ha! Ha! That is some funny shit Patsy.

Let's agree to disagree and move on. If you want to continue this crap that is your choice. If you feel the need to get in the last word, go for it.

If DHB can be developed into a reliable intermediate target (10 to 20 yards) for Russell, this will have as much 'value' to the Raiders winning as his ability to get deep.

RT:

With the Chefs and Donkeys suspect this year, this is the time for the Raiders to start climbing the competitive ladder. If not now, when? IMO, striving for anything less than the playoffs is unworthy.

I'm not looking at numbers in a vacuum when I'm comparing Crabtree and DHB. Or at least I don't think I am. I know a spread offense will hyper-inflate receiving numbers. Which is why I was talking of making the most of opportunities.

It's not a straight comparison but in 2007 both Crabtree & DHB played against VA. DHB at home, Crabtree in the Gator Bowls.

In 2008 both played against Nevada, Crabtree at Nevada, DHB in the Humanitarian Bowl

DHB: 4rec/48yds/12avg/0tdCrabtree 7rec/158yds/22.6avg/1td

In 2 years Crabtree had 231 receptions for 41 td's so about 18% of the time he touched the football it turned into a touchdown. In 3 years DHB had 138 receptions for 13 touchdowns so about 9% of the time he touched the football it turned in a touchdown.

I know there are multiple factors that go into scoring touchdowns, but for me it's about making the most of opportunities, especially! if DHB is heads and shoulders above everybody else physically. It's not just the amount of yards and catches, but what he did each time he touched the ball. I also understand that DHB was doubled teamed a lot, but don't you think Crabtree was also?

BR - I'll take your word that scouts have said he runs precise routes and doesn't have a problem dropping the ball. Everything I read said the opposite. I only saw him play once (against Cal and truthfully I don't even remember him). I also only saw Crabtree play once (against TX) and I was whoa who is this guy? Maybe the Raiders could get him...

H - I disagree. I don't think you can teach focus or concentration. My sister's a teacher and I think she'd agree with me. ;) You can change mechanics, teach how to run a route or whatever. But the ability to catch a ball, really well, I believe is instinct more than anything else and what separates these young men from everybody else on the planet. I just don't think you can teach that skill. But time will tell.

I'm not a scout so I can honestly only go by the things I read and by what my eyes told me when I saw both play. For whatever it's worth (and probably not much) Crabtree caught my attention, DHB didn't.

Look I really want DHB to succeed and be that missing link that leads us to the promised land. OR even the land of .500 (wow how have we gotten to this point?). I just think there were safer picks for needs just as pressing as a deep threat WR, like a OT to protect Russell's blindside or a DT to stop the run.

The fact that the secondary was a need in THIS draft is... words fail me. Horrible, awful, cf, a complete and utter fail on the Raider's drafting philosophy?

Fair or not I watched the draft and thought What? Who? Reach!! Then... oh, sigh more of the same. The strength of the Raider's has never been in drafting. It's always been in their FA evaluation and signing. But as that has, for whatever reason, been failing we find ourselves in a really bad spot. Plugging holes in the dike with gum.

I so want the Raiders to be good again. It's been a really long time since they were a force in the NFL. And frankly I'm tried of being the laughingstock of the league. I know a lot of you couldn't care less about that, but it bothers me. I'm tired of watching the same old Raiders year in and year out making the same mistakes over and over and over again. Underachieving. Undisciplined. Looking over matched and out maneuvered. Maybe it will be different now, I certainly hope so. I think players like Asomugha deserve better. To be in an organization that is not only respected but valued. To have someone of his caliber, commitment, character and skill be the norm and not the exception.

I was looking at the Raiders' record over the last 25 years. I wasn't surprised to see we are under .500 in that span. And if you take out Gruden's four years our winning percentage plummets. (And yes that's strawman, but I think Gruden's teams were different). In that time we've gone to the Superbowl twice, with a W and L, but unless we win the Superbowl this year, that win goes away after this season, meaning after the 2009 season in 25 years we will have gone to the Superbowl once and lost. In a blow out. I want the Raiders' to succeed. I want them to be good.

How did we get to this place? I know there are no simple answers. It's to easy to just say "it's all Al Davis' fault" though he has been the only constant over these last 25 years. It's not really a question that I expect can be answered, I'm more venting/rambling than anything else. I know that in the true scheme of things, football doesn't mean all that much. But I like it. I enjoy it and I want to watch good football again.

Maybe DHB will be a step in the right direction of that goal.... sorry but I don't have high hopes for Mitchell.

Bama7This draft was bothersome because we continued with our ancient habits of drafting players ahead of where they should go and overvaluing speed when production is non-existent. As to be expected, Blanda, H, Gary and Buttery Pat spout the party line and hail it as a marvelous job. Arguing with them is like beating your head against a wall. With that said, eventually the law of averages will catch back up to Mr davis and a few of his odder picks will finally pan out. I think that will happen with a few in this 2009 draft. I too was alarmed about Mitchell but once I watched his youtube highlights I began to not just like this pick but began loving it. Yes, he's reasonably fast. But in addition to that he is knocking folks out on the video! The MAC is no chump conference and is loaded with good offenses. Plus they really beat Ohio State last year, just not on the scoreboard. Mitchell is EXACTLY the type of player i have been wanting. Parcells said if they don't bite when thier puppies, they'll never bite... or something like that. This cat Mitchell bites. I think the 'experts" missed here and that this guy will be very, very good. Just a hunch As for Bey, they say he had no QB help. He's as big as crabtree and faster. Yes, he's a reach and no I wouldn't have taken him. classic Al pick here. When so many other studs could be found to help our defensive line, I just don't get it. Murphy: Saw this guy have a good day in a physical indoor game against Florida in the SEC championship. I'll take him. He played big in a big game, against a really good defense. Shaunessy: Tyler Brayton redux. Hopefully as I mentioned earlier the odds will finally work in our favor with such a reach. The LB from Oregon state: didn't they shut down mighty USC and Sanchez? Enough for me. I'll take him.Overall Grade: C+. Biggest return: Mitchell. You don't just get lucky knocking people down left and right like he is in that video. I bet he end up being something special. Man, have y'all watched that thing?

Look at the Lions, what have they done? or the Bengals, they went to the Super Bowl twice and LOST BOTH TIMES.

WE are not those teams, they play in crappy stadiums, nothing like the Oakland Alameda County Coliseum. They have very questionable management, nothing like the Raiders, Am I missing something here?

Our team has had some unfortunate luck and whiney coaches with some players that just won't play the way they are supposed to. But come on, the Raiders are going to the Big Show this year, how can you not see that? We win our division be default, that is a given. Remember the Raiders of '79? I see this team being a lot like that. Russell looks so much like Jim Plunkett back there, we have just as good of a Rec. core, just as good as RB's and an O-line that has the potential to be just as good. With the great coaching of Cable, the O-line is going to be the strong point of this team.

The defense, with ALL THAT TALENT how can we lose? Al Davis' defensive scheme with Mitchell at safety.... I'm stoked. A first rounder as our FG kicker and the best P since Ray Guy, what else do you want?

Let's face it, as much as you complain about "bad times" with the Raiders, you should think of how great we will be this year. I can almost see Al Davis getting the Super Bowl handed to him in his wheelchair. And Al Davis telling HIS team how they belong with the Greats of all time.... I'm tingling all over, this is our year Toni, why can't you see that?

NY Raider, that was me who made the comment about how the Raiders are either poor at evaluating talent or poor at developing it. However, I used the all important "and/or" qualifier since I feel the Raiders can neither evaluate NOR develop talent well.

On the evaluation side, all you need to do is look at last season's free agent signings of DeAngelo Hall, Javon Walker, Gibril Wilson, etc. to see how badly Al flubbed that one.

As for the draft, let's look back at the 2004 draft going forward since 2004 was the first year we had high draft picks, and how many of those picks wound up making it to the Pro Bowl.

2004: No Pro Bowlers drafted 2005: No Pro Bowlers drafted (although they gave up their #1 for Randy Moss)2006: No Pro Bowlers drafted2007: No Pro Bowlers drafted2008: No Pro Bowlers drafted

Does anyone else find it shocking that NO ONE we've drafted since 2004 has made the Pro Bowl? I mean, that's not to say that we don't have some damn good players in Kirk Morrison, Thomas Howard, etc. but the complete lack of All-Star recognition is astounding.

So does that mean that the Raiders are simply horrible at picking good players, or is it that they can't teach them? Like most everyone else here, I thought Art Shell & Jackie Slater would have done wonders with Robert Gallery. instead, they might have ruined him with trying to make him block man-to-man. The revolving door of coaches hasn't helped him either.

Al's notorious for bringing in lackeys to coach and then paying them bottom dollar. What a surprise that no real teaching gets done to the players. And on the occasions when a decent coach IS brought in and starts to bring consistency and progress to the team (Gruden, Shanahan) their relationship with Al sours and they find themselves out the door. It's a job that not many people in the NFL want. If there was ever a "it's a dirty job, but someone's got to do it" line of work, this is it. And when you have that kind of work environment, it's tough to find good people to man it...and especially at rock bottom prices.

Everyone be honest here...does anyone have any true optimism that Tom Cable has the innovation and leadership to take this team to the Super Bowl? Or do you see him as just an Al Davis lackey stopgap that, hopefully, can at least get this team to 8-8? I had more hope in Lane Kiffin when he was first hired than when I heard Tom Cable was re-hired.

The one thing I do admire Tom Cable for though is his OL expertise. However, it's not like the team helped him build on that in the draft. Instead of playing to Cable's strength, they're hoping he can keep the line functioning just well enough so that JaMarcus Russell has more than two seconds to find Darrius Heyward-Bey fifty yards downfield. Some people in the work force are damn good supervisors, but can't cut it as a manager. To me, that's what I see in Tom Cable.

Toni, the clips I watched of Crabtree didn't show him being double teamed that much because so many of his catches were near the line of scrimmage. It was typical to see Crabtree line up on the outside, but run a horizontal patern to the middle of the field at the line, catch the ball there and run through holes created by the linemen.

DHB, on the other hand, ran a good deal of fly patterns, and also caught balls 7 to 10 yards up over the middle.

In that respect, Crabtree was often used as more of a running back taking a forward handoff, while DHB was used to change the defense on the field. DHB was used the way the Raiders used to use Cliff Branch, while Crabtree was used the way the Raiders wish to use McFadden.

On that basis, you can't compare them by comparing their production against the same opponents.

Now, imagine Higgins and DHB spreading the CBs deep, Schilens occupies the safeties over the middle, and McFadden catches the ball at the line of scrimmage, running through the slow linemen fairly easily, with the DBs locked in down field.

Doobie, part of the reason we aren't putting anybody in the probowl is because we're only winning five games a season. Gallery would have gone this year had we done better. Pro Bowl selections are very subjective. Nnamdi should have been to the Pro Bowl in each of the last three years.

I have never in some 45+ years of football(I'm 58") seen anyone as fast as this "S"...He is 4-7 yds deep in his back-field and hits the line like he was shot out of a cannon...He does not miss his target...He hits with velocity and runs ya down from behind...This guy has "Blitz" written all over him...

To have a player of that size with that speed is totally remarkable and I can see why the Raiders were impressed by him....I watched that film and came away happy to have him on the team...Total play-maker...Ball hawker...Head Hunter...

RT...

May I remind you that with the addition of "Pussy" as "GM" in "KC" the general statements on this board were as to how that team would immediately improve and become a winner while the Raiders will stay in the dungeon...

Same was said about the "Donko"s with their new "HC" from those same "Cheatsters"....

But now all of a sudden you post how the Raiders should be on top and these teams are going no-where...

That brotha is the complete opposite of what was being shoved down our throats a few months back...So now Brotha...Please...realize that what was said hasn't happened and at this time looks NOT to happen anytime soon...

It's not just the new "QB"s that makes them look so bad...It's everything coming out of those camps...It's the stupidity of their existence...

I said NOTHING about any "Play-Off" record or any of the rest of this crap...Where did this come from...

"You're already bagging on Pioli because he might not get the Chiefs into the playoffs this year while you are hoping that our GM can finally, maybe, hopefully get us to eight wins after six years of record-setting losing."

Here is what I wrote again so you can explain where the hell that other crap came from....Maybe you were confusing me with someone else...

Now I did hear you right....Correct...They are weaker after the acquisitions at "GM"-n-"HC"...

Their NOT weaker because...Well because their draft was so bad or because they lost so many players...Right...Tell me that it's because their in disarray and so unsettled that nobody can figure out what the hell their doing...

I will now sit back a wait for your explanation...This started out as just a friendly little "Rib" because of the obvious contradiction...

"Doobie, part of the reason we aren't putting anybody in the probowl is because we're only winning five games a season." from Blanda

Doobie, how can you argue with that? How can you have Pro Bowl players when you are only winning 5 Games a year. Come on, do think the media and league are going to pick guys from a team that isn't winning?

How bout Fargas, he had that GREAT yr in Kiffin's ( the bitch) first year. Did he go to the Pro Bowl? That just proves how many other Raiders should be in the Pro Bowl. We have Pro Bowl players, they just don't get recognized because we are losing. I took a course in this and it is very true.

H - if you're trying to convince me that DHB comes with all the creditials of Crabtree or other WRs ranked higher, don't bother.

The numbers just aren't there to rank him at or above the top WRs in this draft. Plus, let's not forget he's a junior(which carries inherent risk). We're 2 full years into Russell's mega contract and we still don't know what we have. Now we have to overpay DHB for his #7 placement in the draft.

Spin this anyway you want, but the Raiders should not have used a #7 pick on this guy.

Even in an undervalued trade, the Raiders still get DHB along with additional draft picks. That's my primary criticism.

Toni, it kills me to say that it's all Al Davis' fault but, like any other organization, the blame always has to be shouldered at the top. And Al's hands-on handling of the team makes him an especially guilty target.

As I've mentioned in the past, I love Al Davis and hold him in the deepest regard. Without Al, there would be no Raiders, and especially not the Raiders we all love. There would be no Raider Nation, there would be no Black Hole and there may not even be a Raider Take filled to the rim with passionate fans who some, apparently, are willing to come to blows over this draft discussion.

Al loves this team and he will do just about anything to see the Raiders succeed.

Unfortunately, despite Al Davis' good intentions, his style of running this team is no longer effective. The days of simply being able to draft the most physically gifted players and teach them football is long over. Nowadays, most everyone has access to the same information as everyone else and the hidden gems are hard to find.

With a more level playing field and especially with an emphasis on physical fitness nowadays (as opposed to the 70's) that puts most players on an even keel and the focus has shifted more towards play execution and play calling. The most successful players aren't usually the most physically imposing, they're often the smartest and most disciplined.

However, Al is unable to adapt. He tries to hire coaches to take him in a winning direction, but as soon as they start seeing success, Al thinks he can make things even better by tinkering. That in turn leads to friction with his coach and they are dismissed.

Truly great leaders are able to see their faults and make adjustments for them. If they are weak financially, they'll find themselves a financial guru and hire them. If their product line is stagnant, they'll try to find someone who has the innovation to revive the brand.

However, Al Davis is either unable to change his ways, or is unwilling. Despite his best efforts and good intentions, he is unable to see that it is he who is the cause of the problems. If this were a novel, he'd be in position to be the perfect tragic hero. However, a tragic hero learns from their mistakes...something Al shows no sign of doing.

NY, the Raiders decided, going in, they wanted DHB. At number 7, both Maclin and Crabtree were still on the table. The Giants were preparing to trade up to take DHB at 16. They would have had to increase their offer for the Raiders #7, which they were not prepared to do. That means, in order for the Raiders to get their target, they would have had to trade with SF at 10, as nobody else (between 7 and 16) wanted a WR in the first round. I don't think you're going to get much switching places between 7 and 10.

After number 6 was selected, the 49ers didn't have to trade anything because all three WRs were still on the table.

With this information, tell me how you figure the Raiders could have had DHB AND a couple of extra picks.

Blanda - even if that were true, the Raiders make claim to not ever attempting to trade down. 3 slots at the top of the first round carries more value than you give credit. We got two extra picks and only moved 7 slots in Rd 2. Hell, we only got a Rd 4 pick for Randy Moss. Three slots at the top of the draft can be huge.

I want to qualify my statements again and say that my criticism falls entirely on the Raiders, not Heyward-Bey, whom I hope will break Doobie's previously outlined trend of consecutive top Raider picks snubbed by the pro bowl.

Someday, we will reach the vaunted .500 mark. Maybe not this year, and I know that those of you with low expectations are okay with that, but someday we will, after seven or eight years of trying...And then folks will come here and tell me, "I told you so!" And we will all rejoice in our newfound motto, Commitment to Competence. Hooray!

NY, you completely overrun my point. The only trading partner was the 49ers at 10. When we got to the Raiders ALL THREE of the top WRs were still available. If the 49ers just wanted one of the top receivers, they didn't have to make a trade at that point. It wasn't very likely that positions 7, 8 AND 9 were all going to take WRs.

I agree on Mitchell. Solid hitter, with good tackling skills. Seems unafraid of contact, which is good for a safety.

Toni,

You most certainly can teach focus and concentration. I think some of the guys will back me up here. If you go through a military combat training school it's probably 75% concentration and focus, which is gained via repitition and a lot of people screaming at you.

The key is, does the student (player) want to learn. If they resist, it won't happen.

Doobie,

I would definitely agree on the "developing" angle. It's something Blanda and I have complained about. That's why we like Cable talking about "teaching" being something he wants in his coaches.

That was a point of minor contention we had with Gruden. He was very good with veteran players, but seemed to lack the patience to work with and develope the younger players.

Gallery was considered a complete bust. Cable comes along and he is now playing at a near Pro Bowl level at guard.

Developing the players is a coach's responsibility.

Take,

Who is saying it's acceptabel? Not me. It's just that I can't do anything about it, so I want to look forward (well, except for those glory years of my youth). I'm tired of all the whinning about the last six years.

Also, I don't believe in "I Told You So's". I'll just enjoy the ride when it happens. And, so should everyone here.

There seems to be some confusion as to why H and I argue the way we do. Some people seem to think that we hope the Raiders win just to prove everyone else wrong. That's not what's on our minds. We want the Raiders to win because - we're Raider fans.

However, I do believe that there are those here who would like the Raiders to lose in order to prove themselves right. However, I think that's typical of anonymous posters who just don't want to be available for "I told you so."

That said, I back H up with my assessment that the primary problem has been the apparently focused rejection of DEVELPING talent. Gruden recognized the need for it, he was just crappy at it. Calahan didn't see the use of it, neither did Turner, Shell or Kiffin. Over the last several years we've been looking at a team comprised of high profile/high contract players combined with uneducated journeymen.

Cable is the first HC to come in here, look among the journeymen and say, "you know, there's some talent here that hasn't been developed. Let's develop it." Also, "you know there some are high price talents here that seem uninterested in improving the team. Let's get rid of them." And, "you know, what we need to do is to really sit down and discuss what the team needs at a basic level in terms of FA acquisitions and draftees."

I think that preceding paragraph will do more to improve this team than any of the things we bicker over.

While we're complaining that DHB was a reach, it wasn't nearly as big a leap as the "experts" said about Mitchell. That seems to be changing today. Not only did the experts have to appoligize to Mitchell, but many teams recognized Mitchell's unheralded promise, and were prepared to pull the trigger on him as well. But the Raiders, along with obtaining two more draft picks, slipped neatly in to scoop him up before the rush.

Folks who want to talk about reaching don't seem much interested in talking about Mitchell. That's because it is looking like Mitchell might not have been a reach at all, especially with the Bears ready to scoop him up two picks later and the Cowboys prepared to do so if the Bears faultered. This pick is beginnin to reek of due dilligence.

And if they applied that same kind of due dilligence to DHB, which they claim to have done, maybe DHB wasn't such a reach either. Especially in view of the fact that there were several teams who would have been glad to take him starting about 10 picks later.

Blanda & Jones, I suppose the Pro Bowl argument can be perceived a "chicken or the egg" argument, but I tend to think the reason we're not winning games is because we're not drafting Pro Bowl talent (and/or developing it)...not the other way around.

"Then there’s this testimonial from Clif Marshallof Performance Director at Ignition, the outfit that worked with Mitchell on position drills in preparation for his workouts in front of NFL scouts and coaches.

“'Michael is one of the most impressive guys that we’ve had here in our program,' Marshall told the Dayton News. 'When he comes into work, his demeanor is all business. He attacks all his workouts and drills. The hamstring is good. He is committed to rehabbing hours each day and is a tough guy who will be ready for his workouts.'

“'Michael’s combination of size, speed and ability on the field is what makes him an intriguing prospect. He’s not one of these guys who will just test well. You have four years of film to watch him in action. I believe that’s what makes him so attractive to teams.'

"Ohio University defensive coordinator/safeties coach Jimmy Burrow said Mitchell succeeded in improving his weaknesses each year in his four-year collegiate career and is reminiscent of former Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Denver Broncos strong safety John Lynch."

blanda,if cable is here to "develop" talent then he's screwed. hey don't get me wrong. i'm all for developing talent. thing is, how many years are we going to keep doing this and when will we see the fruits of this "development" if davis keeps hiring/firing coaches on a yearly basis? developing a cohesive squad takes a few years but if your egotistical owner can't wait any more after the year then what's the point? we'll always be developing talent and every year it'll be different types of talent based on the coach's philosophy at the time.

now i originally lambasted davis for these picks but i am slowly changing my colors after reading up on all of our picks. blitzchick has some very good points. even some of the local media are starting to come around. these guys need a chance just as the coaching staff needs a chance to make this thing work. the key is davis. it always is. the problem is, no one can work with that evil eye staring over your shoulder!

Are you serious? Al Davis is littering this team with Pro Bowl talent. It's the coaches who keep messing it up and / or the players who just won't play hard enough (spoiled?).

The Raiders ALWAYS field a great team, it just depends on the players wanting to win or not. If the coaches are not listening to Al, then the players just won't play for them. The Pro Bowl talent is undeniable and when the wins come this year, we will have at least 6 players in the Pro Bowl.

How is it Al's fault that these coaches can't get the best out of the extraordinary talent Al gives them? A mediocre coach like Gruden ( trader) got Al's players to 3 straight playoff games. That just proves that if the coach does his job, this team will flourish.

Al Davis knows more about football than you have ever dreamed of knowing. He is doing his job, it's just everybody else who is screwing it up. Now that we have the Great Tom Cable at the helm.....the sky is the limit, how can you not be stoked...Am I missing something here?

blanda, with davis a couple of coaching changes or so ago, he "admitted" that it'll take some time to get back to winning ways. my point is if cable is developing this squad then davis should give him a chance to do what he was hired for and that is to develop this team the way he thinks it should be developed without the owner constantly firing his coaches.

with regards to your blitzchick comment... look, i too was only 1 of millions of raider fans who were absolutely pissed last saturday. with all i've read on these players (the drafted ones that is) all i'm saying is that i'm willing to give them a chance. so yeah, if you say i'm latching on to her for a little optimism and you feel left out - ok i'll include you in there too. but that doesn't mean i pray to the al davis altar like you do though. sorry, had to make sure you still know which side of the fence i stand.

I don't think you can use the Pro Bowl as a measure of success at all, especially when the fans have as much say in it as they do. Philip Rivers had the best numbers at quarterback last year, and he didn't get in. Favre did, and he threw more interceptions than touchdowns. There's a ton of other examples, too. Nnamdi didn't get in when he had 8 interceptions. He was less statistically impressive last year, but he got in because his reputation increased. Jon Ogden said himself that most of his selections had to do with his reputation. The players themselves look at the Pro Bowl as kind of a joke, and an excuse to take a free vacation to Hawaii. Why should we view it differently?

Scorpio, I'd argue that what seems to make this season different the previous six is Cable's hands on involvement, and working directly with Al to get things done. I think that as far as these particular draft picks are concerned, we are not going to get a fair picture until they get on the field. So the draft picks, right now, are a question mark.

But regarding the rest of the off season, the Raiders have played it smart and close to the vest - like the old days.

I have to believe that each of the HCs over the last six years had the same opportunity to work with Davis as Cable. The difference with Cable seems to be that he doesn't wrap the whole situation up in his own ego. He doesn't worry about appearing weak while working to make the Raiders stronger.

Mind you, I'm not arguing that the difference is Davis, I'm arguing that the difference is Cable. One can have a ligitimate discussion about why we've had the coaches we've had over the last six years, but the fact is that so far Cable appears to be a great improvement.

And because of Cable's ability to work with Davis, I suspect that he'll be around for awhile. From Cable you won't hear - "I can't win because Al picks all of the players and I don't get any."

Are you serious? Al Davis is littering this team with Pro Bowl talent. It's the coaches who keep messing it up and / or the players who just won't play hard enough (spoiled?).

The Raiders ALWAYS field a great team, it just depends on the players wanting to win or not. If the coaches are not listening to Al, then the players just won't play for them. The Pro Bowl talent is undeniable and when the wins come this year, we will have at least 6 players in the Pro Bowl.Jones, did you actually type that with a straight face? If you did, then I'm starting to wonder if you're really Al Davis posting under a pseudonym. To that I will repeat what I said before.

2003: 4-122004: 5-112005: 4-122006: 2-142007: 4-122008: 5-11

These numbers disprove just about everything you said. Until this team starts winning, I have questions about the overall talent level of this team. To quote Bill Parcells, "you are what your record says you are".

Pat, I think we all know the Pro Bowl selection system is flawed but it DOES usually identify talent. For the Raiders draft picks from 2004-2008 to be shut out completely from the Pro Bowl is definitely worth noting.

Blanda, also Asomugha was elected in 2006 and 2008, but he was drafted in 2003 and I was using the 2004-2008 drafts for my sample (since they were high picks following poor years).

Doobie, not that it never happens, but how many times do you see first or second year players on a Pro Bowl roster. Usually there's one or two every year out of a hundred and something (primary selections and alternates). I'd argue that you almost never see one from a losing team.

Part of Pat's complaint was that selections aren't made for that season's contributions but for reputation established over several seasons.

I'm sorry if I contributed to the descent into chaos, it was not my intention. I'm sorry you all had to suffer through what was a personal disagreement about style and conduct. I felt wronged and that retribution was in order. That was the wrong idea. I should have taken the slights and backhanded insults in stride, and been the better man, and what I did was let it provoke me. That's like the first lesson my mom taught me, and I know she wouldn't be proud of my actions.

Calico: I really hope that you're as embarrassed as you should be that you posted what you did. I know that you can't possibly be proud of it. Flexing nuts and bringing up military service on the internet to show your tough-guy rep is about as low on the totem pole as it gets, and that's from the proud son of a Marine. I'm ready to move on. I'm honestly really sorry I provoked such an undignified moment from you. You have no idea who I am and where I've been, and I won't bore you with the details. Assume I'm some snot-nosed punk who knows nothing of the world, it's fine with me. I don't think we're going to be bestest pals ever, but who knows? Most of the other posters on this board like you, and maybe I can learn to like you too. Maybe eventually you might not think I'm such a bad guy myself.

H: Entirely right, as usual. I can't believe I let myself get as wrapped up as I did, it's not me and it never has been. I've had a real crummy time lately, I won't go into it, but I think it may have contributed to me getting a bit more roused than usual. It's no excuse, but I don't think I've been myself lately.

Take: Everything you said is on the money, and you are correct. In fact, I contemplated heavily everything I posted, thinking maybe I was being too mean, too harsh. The problem was that I WANTED to attack the person, not the idea. I justified it as reasonable because I felt wronged. As I said before, that was the wrong idea, and it's so fundamentally against what I believe and how I carry myself in life. I'm really sorry I derailed things, I considered not even posting this because of it, but I felt like I had to address everything in order to process it and move past it. And I promise I won't swear for at least a couple months, okay? :)

Doobie: JONES is being ironic. It's his latest attention-grabbing mechanism. I think he figured out that yelling and screaming about how the Raiders sucked and insulting nicknames wasn't going to do it, and thought maybe if he switched his approach it would. He's a good troll, but not much of an original one.

Oops, that accidentally posted as anonymous. Yeah, it was me, ol' ButteryPat. And Doobie, while I'm triple-posting, I don't think the Pro Bowl system is simply flawed, I think it's broken. Nobody doesn't make it who had a genuinely bad season, for sure, but the Raiders not having anybody in it doesn't mean they aren't on an all-star level. Fan involvement, and to a smaller extent media, is the crux of the problem, and it's why Brett Favre got in every year and feel-good stories like Tony Romo and Derek Anderson got in when their production decreased mid-season. The fact that they don't wait for the season to be more than halfway over to do the voting is also a big problem. All of these are why the players think the Pro Bowl is such a joke. I doubt it's any good for leverage on a contract, either.

I find it curious how many folks, like Mark McGwire, don't want to talk about the past.

The problem is that the "past" for the Raiders is not far removed from the present. Less than 12 months ago, our GM whiffed on three major free agent signings: Walker, Wilson and Hall.

This created needs at the WR and Safety positions, which apparently overrode our need for offensive linemen on draft day this year.

The reason we ran with scissors in free agency in the first place is because our GM stuck with Schweigert and Porter way too long, creating desperation and vacancy at those positions when the organization finally woke up and smelled the coffee long after the rest of us did. Michael Huff's failure as an impact player didn't help at the safety position.

(Still, it takes some might big scissors to guarantee JAVON WALKER $16 million and then convince him to stick around after he loses his marbles in Vegas and expresses his interest in quitting).

So I'm sorry to talk about the past, but the fact is that the dominoes are still falling right now, until further notice.

Folks say we need to give our draft picks a chance to prove themselves on the field. Fair enough. Well, the same goes for the organization. Until the Raiders prove that they can perform, they can't perform, and haven't for the "past" six years.

I used to be a glass half full guy with the Raiders, but the glass is now half empty until they pour me some more water.

Cable is the first HC to come in here, look among the journeymen and say, "you know, there's some talent here that hasn't been developed. Let's develop it." Also, "you know there some are high price talents here that seem uninterested in improving the team. Let's get rid of them." And, "you know, what we need to do is to really sit down and discuss what the team needs at a basic level in terms of FA acquisitions and draftees."

I think that preceding paragraph will do more to improve this team than any of the things we bicker over.>>>>

HEAR HEAR!!!

With our past coaches we are not only approaching the armegeddan that the ESPN-ites here are predicting, but it would almost be a certainty. Al likes to bring in raw talent, and we had coaches that were either too uninterested, impatient, or incompetent to develop any of them. Plus they were also so incompetent that they left quality players sitting on the bench, while they gave lost causes a million chances to succeed. None of this changed until Cable took over (with the exception of Harris).

Oh, and yes it was Als fault for hiring morons as coaches in the first place... but that doesn't mean that is what we have now.

Oh, and I agree there are people here that will be just as happy with the Raiders losing so they can be right.

Even in an undervalued trade, the Raiders still get DHB along with additional draft picks. That's my primary criticism.>>>>

I haven't scrolled up yet, but has anyone cited a case where any team lately has made a trade into the top ten for anyone besides a QB???

I mean, do we all have to have ESPN-itis at the same time?

Even PFT mentioned it weeks ago:

Jags Trying Hard To Trade Out Of The Top TenPosted by Mike Florio on April 13, 2009, 4:42 p.m. EDT

As the 2009 draft approaches, several teams in the top ten actively are trying to trade out of it.

We’re hearing that this group includes the Lions, Chiefs, and Browns.

It also includes the Jaguars, whom we’re told are desperately trying to get out of the eighth overall spot in the draft.

But the Jags currently can find no takers.

Nor can any of the other teams in the top ten.

As one league source explained it, there are three issues making the top-ten teams want to get out, and keeping other teams from wanting to get in.

First, the money paid at the top of the draft has gotten out of hand. Even hard-core agent types who previously have argued with us about this issue are now admitting that the values of the contracts at the top of the process are too high.

Second, there’s no “bell cow” in the draft — no must-have player in the view of one or more teams.

Third, there’s no real separation between the top players at each position. For example, Michael Crabtree isn’t $20 million better than Hakeem Nicks. But if Crabtree goes within the first seven picks of the round and Nicks goes in the last ten, the dollar value of their respective contracts will entail a gap potentially that large, if not larger.

Ditto for the tackles and the quarterbacks.

So why take a guy at No. 2 when a comparable player can be gotten — for much less money — at No. 20?

In the end, this year’s experience could provide just enough ammunition to get a meaningful rookie wage scale implemented as part of the next CBA.

If we're running with the idea that good teams make good decisions and bad teams make bad decisions, how does the Giants and Bears interest in our top two draft picks sit? They seemed to see similar things. Both of them went to Super Bowls fairly recently.

And hey, has anybody seen this bit of disgrace yet: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NpAN7O2UWM

I can't believe what a self-important jerk Cris Carter is. Yeah, Cris, it really takes a hall-of-fame wide receiver to repeat Heyward-Bey's statline and college accomplishments. He didn't have one insightful thing to say, and yet he wants to be deferred to because of his career. Did it seem to anybody else like he had never seen the kid play? That's what I'm noticing, though. Every day another analyst comes out and says they like the Heyward-Bey pick. I think now they're starting to do their job, and they're realizing they may have had a false line. The worst part was the snickering during the interview. I think what Tom Cable needs to do is post pictures of Cris Carter looking befuddled and Tom Jackson giggling like an idiot above Darrius' locker for the entirety of training camp. That'll be a great motivational tool.

ButteryPat, what other idea could we run with? That idea goes to the heart of what it means to succeed in the NFL. It's really not even an idea, it's a fact.

Perhaps they were looking at our guys. I hope that's a sign of something. Of course, for those who subscribe to the "idea" that the draft is a crapshoot (despite the fact that some teams clearly and consistently outperform others on draft day), it's a sign of nothing.

The other idea is that both good teams and bad teams make both good and bad decisions. Bill Belichick is fallible, and sometimes Al Davis gets it right. It's not entirely black and white. If the Giants went to the Super Bowl recently, and are thus infallible because of it, obviously them looking at Darrius Heyward-Bey in the first as a replacement for Plaxico Burress means that he is a surefire bet. And no, there's no maybe about it. Both teams were interested. Jerry Angelo said they were interested in Mitchell, and the New York Daily News reported the Giants were interested in trading up for Heyward-Bey. Obviously, I don't believe in this line of thinking, but I think if you're going to argue that the picks are automatically suspect because it's the Raiders and the Raiders have lost, then the opposite must hold true. The Giants and the Bears must always be right, because they had recent success.

The fact that 1 or 2 teams had interest in DHB or Mitchell means absolutely nothing.

You could easily make the case that each every player had a certain level of interest from another club who did not draft the player whether that player was available or not.

Every team including the Pats, Giants, and Bears has their "hits" and "misses". That is the nature of the draft.

Let's assume the Giants would have moved up to take DHB at #16 and the Bears took Mitchell at #49. Does this make the Raiders "justified" in taking DHB and Mitchell? Does this have any bearing whatsoever in terms of how DHB or Mitchell pans out? Of course not.

Each player's abilities and the team they join (coaching, depth chart, playing opportunities, etc.) will ultimately dictate whether or not it was a good pick.

Everyone can play the game of "what if we took Player A instead of Player B" until their blue in the face. Until the players are given the opportunity to sink or swim on the playing field it is just speculation on everyone's part.

When you look at the draft in the big picture it is an opportunity to identify and draft as many players from each class who will make a postive impact on your team long term.

As you stack 1 class on top of another, the teams good at drafting fill holes long term and are able to concentrate on just a few areas.

The teams that have bad drafts find themseleves continually taking a crack at a certain need or position, year after year.

How many draft class and wasted FA signings did it take for us to finally arrive at Nnamdi and Johnson? 8? How many years is it going to take to resolve our DL, Safety, and WR shortcomings?

At some point it has to become apparent that you better hit your mark with the 1st 3 rounds of the draft. This is clearly the best chance to fill long term needs. The 4th round and later are usually players that fufill needs at depth, ST, and ocassionally a hidden gem who shines.